Prognostic Value of Pretreatment Circulating Neutrophils, Monocytes, and Lymphocytes on Outcomes in Lung Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: In the present study, we determined the association of pretreatment circulating neutrophils, monocytes, and lymphocytes with clinical outcomes after lung stereotactic body radiotherapy (sbrt). METHODS: All patients with primary lung cancer and with a complete blood count within 3 months of lung sbrt from 2005 to 2012 were included. Overall survival (os) was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Factors associated with os were investigated using univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. Fine-Gray competing risk regression was performed to test the association of the neutrophil:lymphocyte (nlr) and monocyte:lymphocyte (mlr) ratios with two types of failure: disease-related failure and death, and death unrelated to disease. RESULTS: Of the 299 sbrt patients identified, 122 were eligible for analysis. The median and range of the nlr and mlr were 3.0 (0.3-22.0) and 0.4 (0.1-1.9) respectively. On multivariable analysis, sex (p = 0.02), T stage (p = 0.04), and nlr (p < 0.01) were associated with os. On multivariable analysis, T stage (p < 0.01) and mlr (p < 0.01) were associated with disease-related failure; mlr (p = 0.03), nlr (p < 0.01), and sbrt dose of 48 Gy in 4 fractions (p = 0.03) and 54 Gy or 60 Gy in 3 fractions (p = 0.02) were associated with disease-unrelated death. Median survival was 4.3 years in the nlr≤3 group (95% confidence interval: 3.5 to not reached) and 2.5 years in the nlr>3 group (95% confidence interval: 1.7 to 4.8; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In lung sbrt patients, nlr and mlr are independently associated with os and disease-unrelated death. If validated, nlr and mlr could help to identify patients who would benefit most from sbrt.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".