MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Predictive ability of blood neutrophil-to-lymphocyte and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio in gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST).

2014· article· en· W2908125496 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer M. Racz, Michelle C. Cleghorn, M. Carolina Jimenez, Eshetu G. Atenafu, Timothy Jackson, Allan Okrainec, Lashmi Venkatraghavan, Fayez A. Quereshy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInflammatory Biomarkers in Disease Prognosis
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGiSTMedicineHazard ratioInternal medicineProportional hazards modelUnivariate analysisLymphocyteGastroenterologyMultivariate analysisNeutrophil to lymphocyte ratioOncologyUnivariatePlateletConfidence intervalMultivariate statisticsStromal cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

10556 Background: The immune response, specifically the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), has recently been shown to be prognostic in untreated, primary GIST. Moreover, the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) has been shown to predict outcome in several gastrointestinal tumors; however, no studies have examined its predictive ability in GIST. This study serves to evaluate the prognostic utility of NLR and PLR in patients undergoing surgical resection for GIST. Methods: All patients who underwent surgical resection for primary, localized GIST from 2001 to 2011 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Demographic profile, clinicopathologic variables, laboratory values and recurrence rates were analyzed. NLR and PLR were both assessed pre-operatively. Survival curves were calculated by the Kaplan-Meier product limit method and compared by the log-rank test. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to identify associations with outcome variables. High/low NLR and PLR were determined using optimization techniques, and defined as ≥2.04/<2.04 and ≥245/<245, respectively. Results: 93 patients were included. On univariate analysis, PLR was associated with recurrence-free survival (RFS) (HR .271, 95% CI .078 – .938, p = .039). PLR was also associated with RFS on multivariate analysis (HR .048, 95% CI .003 – .884, p = .041). Patients with low PLR had 2- and 5-year RFS of 94 and 84%, compared with 57 and 57% in those with high PLR. RFS in patients with mitotic rate ≤5/50 HPF with low PLR was significantly longer than in those with high PLR (p = .007). Similarly, RFS in patients with tumor size <5 cm with low PLR was significantly longer than in those with high PLR (p = .004). NLR was not associated with either RFS (p = .226) or overall survival (p = .994). Conclusions: Although there was no association between NLR and survival, a low PLR was associated with improved RFS, especially in tumors with mitotic rate ≤5/50 HPF or <5 cm. The independent prognostic ability of PLR to predict disease recurrence in these patients suggests that it may play a role in risk stratification schemes when deciding which patents will benefit from adjuvant therapy.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.339 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicInflammatory Biomarkers in Disease Prognosis→French-language works237,207→