The lymphocyte–monocyte ratio predicts tumor response and survival in patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer who received definitive chemoradiotherapy
Authors Liu X, Li M, Zhao F, Zhu Y, Luo Y, Kong L, Zhu H, Zhang Y, Shi F, Yu J
Received 18 October 2016
Accepted for publication 22 December 2016
Published 14 February 2017 Volume 2017:10 Pages 871—877
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single-blind
Peer reviewers approved by Dr Ru Chen
Peer reviewer comments 3
Editor who approved publication: Dr Yao Dai
Xuemei Liu,1,2,* Minghuan Li,2,* Fen Zhao,2 Yingming Zhu,2 Yijun Luo,2 Li Kong,2 Hui Zhu,2 Yan Zhang,2 Fang Shi,2 Jinming Yu2
1School of Medicine and Life Sciences, University of Jinan-Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences, 2Department of Radiation Oncology, Shandong Cancer Hospital and Institute, Jinan, Shandong, People’s Republic of China
*These authors contributed equally to this work
Background: The lymphocyte–monocyte ratio (LMR), a simple biomarker that can reflect the antitumor immune response of the host, has been associated with patient prognosis in several solid tumors. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether LMR can predict clinical tumor response and prognosis in patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) who received definitive chemoradiotherapy (CRT).
Patients and methods: A total of 162 advanced ESCC patients treated at our institution between January 2012 and December 2013 were retrospectively recruited for analysis. Patients were treated with a platinum-based bimodal cytotoxic drug chemotherapy and concurrent radiation therapy. The LMR was calculated from blood counts in samples collected prior to treatment initiation. The predictive value of LMR for clinical tumor response and prognosis was examined.
Results: The LMR before CRT was significantly higher in 48 patients who achieved clinical complete response (CR) compared to that in patients who did not achieve clinical CR (4.89±1.17 vs 3.87±1.29, P<0.001). Compared to their matched counterparts, patients in the high LMR group (LMR >4.02) showed a good clinical tumor response (P<0.05). A significant independent association between a high pretreatment LMR and better outcomes was identified in a multivariate analysis for progression-free survival (PFS; hazard ratio [HR]=2.17; P<0.001) and overall survival (OS; HR=2.02; P=0.002).
Conclusion: In ESCC patients, a high LMR before treatment, which indicates a robust host immune system, is associated with both a good clinical tumor response after definitive CRT and favorable prognosis.
Keywords: esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, lymphocyte–monocyte ratio, definitive chemoradiotherapy, tumor response, prognosis
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]
Other articles by this author:
The prognostic value of nodal skip metastasis in resectable thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
Song G, Jing W, Xue S, Guo H, Yu J
Published Date: 25 May 2017
The association of HMGB1 expression with clinicopathological significance and prognosis in Asian patients with colorectal carcinoma: a meta-analysis and literature review
Zhang XL, Yu JM, Li MH, Zhu H, Sun XD, Kong L
Published Date: 8 August 2016
Details of out-field regional recurrence after involved-field irradiation with concurrent chemotherapy for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
Zhang X, Yu J, Li M, Zhu H
Published Date: 23 May 2016
A spectrum of cutaneous toxicities from erlotinib may be a robust clinical marker for non-small-cell lung therapy: a case report and literature review
Jin F, Zhu H, Kong L, Yu JM
Published Date: 23 April 2015