Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28951992›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical oncology2018

Comparison of clinical utility between neutrophil count and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio in patients with ovarian cancer: a single institutional experience and a literature review.

Naoko Komura, Seiji Mabuchi, Eriko Yokoi, Katsumi Kozasa, Hiromasa Kuroda, Tomoyuki Sasano, Yuri Matsumoto, Tadashi Kimura

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Naoko KomuraDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
Seiji MabuchiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan. smabuchi@gyne.med.osaka-u.ac.jp.
Eriko YokoiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
Katsumi KozasaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
Hiromasa KurodaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
Tomoyuki SasanoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
Yuri MatsumotoDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.
Tadashi KimuraDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, 2-2 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveWe retrospectively investigated the prognostic significance and clinical utility of pretreatment neutrophilia and elevated neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer.

methodsClinical data were collected from 344 surgically staged ovarian cancer patients between April 2007 and March 2016 and retrospectively reviewed. Neutrophilia and elevated NLR were defined as a neutrophil count ≥ 8,000/μl and an NLR ≥ 4.0, respectively. Univariate or multivariate analysis was conducted to evaluate the association between pretreatment neutrophilia or elevated NLR and clinicopathological characteristics, optimal surgery rate, progression-free survival (PFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS). Finally, we compared the clinical utility between neutrophil count and NLR by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.

resultsPretreatment neutrophilia and elevated NLR were observed in 24 (7.0%) and 142 (41.3%) patients, respectively. In univariate analysis, both neutrophilia and elevated NLR were found to be associated with short PFS and DSS (p < 0.005). Multivariate analysis showed that neutrophilia and elevated NLR were predictors for shorter survival. In ROC analysis, the NLR tended to have a greater area under the ROC curve (AUC) value than the neutrophil count in predicting recurrence (0.7011 vs 0.6516, p = 0.0546) and had a significantly greater AUC value in predicting DSS (0.7249 vs 0.6379, p = 0.0182). Finally, based on the neutrophil count and NLR, we divided the patients into 3 prognostic groups-high-risk group (elevated NLR with neutrophilia), intermediate-risk group (elevated NLR without neutrophilia), and low-risk group (normal NLR), which allows for individualized and accurate survival estimates.

conclusionsPretreatment neutrophilia and elevated NLR are independent poor prognostic factors in epithelial ovarian cancer patients. The NLR was superior to neutrophil count in predicting the survival of epithelial ovarian cancer patients.

Indexed as

Leukocyte CountCarcinoma, Ovarian EpithelialDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHumansLeukocyte DisordersLymphocyte CountMiddle AgedNeoplasms, Glandular and EpithelialNeutrophilsOvarian NeoplasmsPrognosisRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsROC CurveNeutrophiliaNeutrophil–lymphocyte ratioOvarian cancerSurvival

Identifiers

PMID28951992

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.