MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3113892970 · doi:10.3390/curroncol28010014

The Prognostic Value of Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio in Metastatic Testicular Cancer

2020· article· en· W3113892970 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Domen Ribnikar, Igor Stukalin, Philippe L. Bédard, Robert J. Hamilton, Michael A.S. Jewett, Padraig Warde, Peter Chung, Lynn Anson‐Cartwright, Arnoud J. Templeton, Eitan Amir, Aaron R. Hansen, Daniel Yick Chin Heng, Jeremy Lewin

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTesticular diseases and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of CalgaryPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHazard ratioInternal medicineNeutrophil to lymphocyte ratioMedicineReceiver operating characteristicGastroenterologyCancerLymphocyteProportional hazards modelOncologyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated the prognostic utility of pre-chemotherapy neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in patients with metastatic germ cell tumors (GCTs) undergoing first-line chemotherapy. We utilized two institutional databases to analyze the pretreatment-derived NLR (dNLR). Predictive accuracy was evaluated using the Cox proportional hazard model adjusted for the international germ cell cancer collaborative group (IGCCCG) risk classification. Discriminatory accuracy was evaluated by determining the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). In total, 569 of 690 patients had available dNLR (IGCCCG: good, 64%; intermediate, 21%; poor, 16%). The 5-year and 10-year overall survivals (OSs) for good, intermediate, and poor risk groups were 96.2%, 92.8%, and 62.7% and 93.9%, 90.3%, and 62.7%, respectively. A dNLR of 2 provided the best discriminatory accuracy with an AUROC of 0.58 (95% CI: 0.52–0.65, p = 0.01) for progression-free survival (PFS), whereas for OS, a dNLR of 3 provided the best discriminatory accuracy with an AUROC of 0.62 (95% CI: 0.53–0.70, p < 0.01). A dNLR > 2 was associated with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.99 (95% CI: 1.27–3.12, p < 0.01) for PFS, which lost its effect after adjustment for IGCCCG (HR: 1.44, 95% CI: 0.90–2.30, p = 0.13). For OS, a dNLR >3 was associated with an HR of 3.00 (95% CI: 1.79–5.01, p < 0.01), but lost its effect after adjustment for IGCCCG. Systemic inflammation plays a role in metastatic GCT, but its prognostic utility beyond established algorithms is limited. The general prognostic value of NLR can be seen across a number of tumors, although the consistency and magnitude of the effect differ according to cancer type, disease stage, and treatment received. We identified that an elevated NLR was associated with an adverse PFS and OS, but not independent of the IGCCCG risk classification. dNLRs >2 and >3 were associated with an adverse PFS and OS, respectively, in patients with metastatic GCT receiving first-line chemotherapy, but not independent of the IGCCCG risk classification.

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)0.004
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicTesticular diseases and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207