IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0143061.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Peripheral Blood Neutrophil-To-Lymphocyte Ratio Is Superior to the Lymphocyte-To-Monocyte Ratio for Predicting the Long-Term Survival of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Patients

Author

Listed:
  • Weijuan Jia
  • Jiannan Wu
  • Haixia Jia
  • Yaping Yang
  • Xiaolan Zhang
  • Kai Chen
  • Fengxi Su

Abstract

Purpose: The peripheral hematologic parameters of patients can be prognostic for many malignant tumors, including breast cancer, although their value has not been investigated among the different molecular subtypes of breast cancer. The purpose of this study was to examine the prognostic significance of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and the lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) in different molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Methods: A retrospective cohort of 1570 operable breast cancer patients was recruited between January 2000 and December 2010. The counts of peripheral neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes and platelets were collected and applied to calculate the NLR and the LMR. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard analyses were used to assess the relationship of the NLR and the LMR with disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in all patients and triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients. Results: Univariate analysis revealed that lower NLR (≤2.0) and higher LMR (>4.8) were significantly associated with superior DFS in all patients (NLR, P = 0.005; LMR, P = 0.041) and in TNBC patients (NLR, p = 0.007; LMR, P = 0.011). However, multivariate analysis revealed that only lower NLR was a significant independent predictor of superior DFS and OS in all breast cancer patients (DFS, HR = 1.50 95% CI: 1.14–1.97, P = 0.004; OS, HR = 1.63, 95% CI: 1.07–2.49, P = 0.022) and in TNBC patients (DFS, HR = 2.58, 95% CI: 1.23–5.42, P = 0.012; OS, HR = 3.05, 95% CI: 1.08–8.61, P = 0.035). Both univariate and multivariate analysis revealed that neither the NLR nor the LMR significantly predicted DFS and OS among the patients with other molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Conclusions: A higher pretreatment peripheral NLR significantly and independently indicated a poor prognosis for breast cancer and TNBC, and this measurement exhibited greater prognostic value than a lower LMR. The NLR was not a prognostic factor for other breast cancer subtypes.

Suggested Citation

  • Weijuan Jia & Jiannan Wu & Haixia Jia & Yaping Yang & Xiaolan Zhang & Kai Chen & Fengxi Su, 2015. "The Peripheral Blood Neutrophil-To-Lymphocyte Ratio Is Superior to the Lymphocyte-To-Monocyte Ratio for Predicting the Long-Term Survival of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Patients," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(11), pages 1-13, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0143061
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0143061
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0143061
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0143061&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0143061?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0143061. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.