The prognostic impact of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio on patients with small cell lung cancer receiving first-line platinum-based chemotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The prognostic significance of Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) and Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (PLR) in Small Cell Lung Cancer (SCLC) patients receiving platinum-based chemotherapy is debated. METHODS: This study aims to elucidate their roles in survival outcomes. A systematic search across PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library identified relevant studies. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) evaluated study quality. Meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects and fixed-effects models, supplemented by sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: A total of 11 studies with 3,634 SCLC patients were included. Patients with high NLR had significantly decreased overall survival (OS) (HR = 1.39, 95% CI: 1.18-1.59, P < 0.001) and progression-free survival (PFS) (HR = 1.52, 95%CI: 1.27-1.78, P < 0.001). The OS was not statistically different between high and low PLR groups (HR = 1.13, 95%CI: 0.84-1.43, P = 0.265). Subgroup analysis revealed that OS in high NLR group was significantly lower across different strata, and OS in the high PLR group was significantly lower among patients with limited-stage SCLC (LS-SCLC) and populations with a PLR cutoff value < 160. CONCLUSIONS: High NLR is associated with poor OS and PFS in patients with SCLC receiving first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. PLR does not significantly impact OS, except in LS-SCLC patients and populations with a PLR cutoff value < 160. These findings require further validation from prospective studies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".