| Title |
Prognostic role of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio in lung cancers: a meta-analysis including 7,054 patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
OncoTargets and therapy, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ott.s90875 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Qing-Tao Zhao, Yong Yang, Shun Xu, Xiao-Peng Zhang, Hui-En Wang, Hua Zhang, Zhi-Kang Wang, Zheng Yuan, Guo-Chen Duan |
| Abstract |
Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has recently been reported to be a poor prognostic indicator in lung cancer. However, the prognostic value of the NLR in patients with lung cancer still remains controversial. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the prognostic value of NLR in patients with lung cancer. We performed a comprehensive literature search in PubMed, Ovid, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases in May 2015. Studies were assessed for quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Twenty-two studies with a total of 7,054 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The meta-analysis was performed to generate combined hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Our analysis results indicated that high NLR predicted poorer OS (HR, 1.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.33-1.71; P<0.001) and PFS (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.07-1.67; P=0.012) in patients with lung cancer. High NLR was also associated with poor OS in lung cancer treated by surgical resection (HR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.26-1.99; P<0.001) and chemotherapy (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.08-1.22; P<0.001). In addition, NLR cut-off value =5 (HR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.16-2.12; P=0.003) and NLR cut-off value <5 (HR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.28-1.69; P<0.001). This meta-analysis result suggested that NLR should have significant predictive ability for estimating OS and PFS in patients with lung cancer and may be as a significant biomarker in the prognosis of lung cancer. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Turkey | 1 | 3% |
| Uruguay | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 36 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 21% |
| Unknown | 5 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 58% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 8% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 8 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 October 2015.
All research outputs
#13,448,755
of 22,829,683 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#665
of 2,933 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,095
of 266,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#21
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,683 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,933 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 266,853 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.