Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
    • Special Issues 2025
  • Journal Metrics
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
    • 2008 Nobel Laureates
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Anticancer Research
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Anticancer Research

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
    • Special Issues 2025
  • Journal Metrics
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
    • 2008 Nobel Laureates
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Visit us on Facebook
  • Follow us on Linkedin
Research ArticleClinical Studies

Impact of the Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio as a Biomarker for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

TAKASHI KATO, TARO OSHIKIRI, HIRONOBU GOTO, RYUICHIRO SAWADA, HITOSHI HARADA, NAOKI URAKAWA, HIROSHI HASEGAWA, SHINGO KANAJI, KIMIHIRO YAMASHITA, TAKERU MATSUDA and YOSHIHIRO KAKEJI
Anticancer Research May 2022, 42 (5) 2775-2782; DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.15757
TAKASHI KATO
1Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe University, Hyogo, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
TARO OSHIKIRI
1Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe University, Hyogo, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: oshikiri@med.kobe-u.ac.jp
HIRONOBU GOTO
1Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe University, Hyogo, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
RYUICHIRO SAWADA
1Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe University, Hyogo, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
HITOSHI HARADA
1Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe University, Hyogo, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
NAOKI URAKAWA
1Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe University, Hyogo, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
HIROSHI HASEGAWA
1Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe University, Hyogo, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
SHINGO KANAJI
1Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe University, Hyogo, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
KIMIHIRO YAMASHITA
1Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe University, Hyogo, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
TAKERU MATSUDA
2Division of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe University, Hyogo, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
YOSHIHIRO KAKEJI
1Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe University, Hyogo, Japan;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background/Aim: Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is a deadly malignant disease. This study examined whether the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) can be used as a biomarker to evaluate prognosis in patients with advanced ESCC following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). Patients and Methods: We examined 174 patients between January 2010 and December 2015 at the Kobe University. Of these, 121 were treated with NAC. The PLR cutoff was determined through receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to identify prognostic factors for overall survival (OS). Results: The PLR cutoff for OS in 121 patients was 169.6. Patients with PLR ≥169.6 had worse 5-year OS rates (31.1%) than those with a PLR <169.6 (61.1%, p=0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that a PLR of ≥169.6 was an independent factor for poor prognosis. Conclusion: PLR is an independent prognostic factor for patients with ESCC after NAC and MIE.

Key Words:
  • Biomarker
  • esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
  • platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio

Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is the sixth leading cancer-related cause of death worldwide (1). Despite improvements in surgical techniques (2-4), treatment strategies, and postoperative care, the morbidity and mortality associated with ESCC remain serious, with 5-year overall survival (OS) rates ranging within 15-25% (5, 6). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is one of the standard treatment strategies used worldwide. In Japan, 5-fluorouracil and cisplatin (FP) are typically used preoperatively in patients with advanced ESCC (7). However, esophagectomy is an invasive surgery and thought to be a cause of high morbidity and mortality (8, 9). Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), which employs both laparoscopic and thoracoscopic approaches, has become popular for downregulating invasiveness and the overall risk of postoperative respiratory complications, such as atelectasis (10-13). Furthermore, perioperative inflammatory responses play a key role in carcinogenesis (14). For instance, the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), which is a clear and immediate inflammatory marker, has been used as a prognostic biomarker in ESCC (15). In addition, the serum platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) has been used to predict tumor behavior in several solid tumors (16-20). However, there have been no reports on PLR in ESCC patients treated with MIE after NAC. Despite platelets acting as primary agents in hemostasis (21), the interaction between tumor microenvironments and platelets controls the modulation of angiogenesis (22). Therefore, this study examined whether the preoperative PLR is a useful prognostic factor for ESCC patients treated with MIE after NAC.

Patients and Methods

McKeown MIE, which is our standardized surgical procedure, was performed between January 2010 and December 2015 in 220 patients with ESCC placed in the prone position. Among them, 22 patients with metastatic spread, five patients who underwent macroscopic incomplete resection, one patient who underwent salvage operation, and 18 patients with missing reports were excluded. In total, 174 patients with ESCC, of which 121 were treated with NAC, were enrolled. NAC comprised two 21-day courses of FP (800 mg/m2 of 5-fluorouracil and 80 mg/m2 of cisplatin). Esophagectomy alone was performed in the remaining 53 patients with a cT1N0M0 status. PLR was calculated from the hematological data obtained during the initial and preoperative medical examinations.

The patients were then divided into two groups according to the PLR cutoff for OS, which was calculated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis (23, 24). We assessed the relationship between the PLR values and clinicopathological factors. We then investigated the independent prognostic factors for OS using the Cox proportional hazard model. We also classified the patients according to sex, age, tumor location, tumor invasion depth, lymph node metastasis, postoperative anastomotic leakage, postoperative pneumonia, operative time, and operative blood loss. The tumor invasion depth and lymph node metastasis were evaluated using the eighth edition of the Union for International Cancer Control classification of malignant tumors (25). Perioperative complications were evaluated according to the Clavien–Dindo classification (26). Our research was approved by the institutional review board of the Kobe University.

Statistical analyses. The PLR cutoffs for OS, age, operative time, and amount of blood loss during surgery were determined using ROC curve analysis. To evaluate the relationship between PLR values and clinicopathological factors, we used the χ2 test. Survival curves by PLR were examined using the Kaplan–Meier and log-rank tests. To identify independent prognostic factors for OS, univariate and multivariate analyses were performed using the Cox proportional hazard model. Statistical significance was set at p<0.1 in the univariate analysis and p<0.05 in the subsequent multivariate analysis. We used JMP® (version 14.2; SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA) for all analyses.

We used ROC curves to plot the sensitivity and false-positive rates for the cutoffs, and the area under the ROC curve (AUC) indicated the accuracy of the test (23).

Results

According to the ROC curve, the PLR cutoff for OS was 169.6 (p=0.0183; Figure 1). The patients were divided into two groups based on their PLRs (PLR ≥169.6, n=58; and PLR <169.6, n=116). Table I presents the characteristics of both groups. The cutoff values for age, operative time, and intraoperative blood loss, which were determined according to the ROC curve for OS, were 63 years, 740 minutes, and 415 ml, respectively. There were no significant differences in clinicopathological factors according to PLR values (Table I). Figure 2 presents the OS curves for both groups. The OS was shorter in those with a PLR ≥169.6 (p=0.0089). The 5-year OS rates among those with a PLR <169.6 and those with a PLR ≥169.6 were 66.1% and 46.6%, respectively. As presented in Table II, multivariate analysis showed that a PLR of ≥169.6 [hazard ratio (HR)=1.812; 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.063-3.089; p=0.028], tumor invasion depth (p<0.0001), lymph node metastasis (p<0.0001), pneumonia (HR=1.791; 95%CI=1.086-2.953; p=0.022), and operative time (HR=1.819; 95% CI=1.095-3.021; p=0.020) were independent prognostic factors of low OS.

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

To assess the correlation between the cutoff value of PLR and overall survival in 174 patients, we performed an ROC curve analysis. p=0.0183, AUC=0.60872. PLR, Platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio; ROC, receiver operating characteristic; AUC, area under the curve.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table I.

Characteristics of 174 patients who were grouped based on the PLR cutoff value.

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Kaplan–Meier curve analysis was performed to evaluate overall survival differences in 174 patients. Patients were divided into two groups according to the PLR cutoff value of 169.6. Those with a PLR ≥169.6 exhibited worse overall survival than those with a PLR <169.6 (p=0.0089). PLR, Platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table II.

Univariate and multivariate analyses of prognostic factors for overall survival in 174 patients.

We also analyzed the data of 121 patients who underwent NAC followed by MIE. As presented in Figure 3, the PLR cutoff was also 169.6 (p=0.0016), and the AUC was 0.6439. The patients were also divided by PLR cutoff values (PLR ≥169.6, n=40; and PLR <169.6, n=81). Table III illustrates the characteristics of both groups. The cutoff values for age, operative time, and perioperative blood loss, that were determined according to the ROC curve for OS, were 63 years, 711 minutes, and 415 ml, respectively. We found a significant difference in intraoperative blood loss based on PLR (p=0.0233). Figure 4 presents the OS curves for the two groups. The OS was shorter in those with a PLR ≥169.6 (p=0.0010). The 5-year OS rates among those with a PLR <169.6 and those with a PLR ≥169.6 were 61.1% and 31.1%, respectively. As presented in Table IV, multivariate analysis showed that a PLR of ≥169.6 (HR=2.350; 95% CI=1.293-4.243; p=0.005), tumor invasion depth (p=0.0161), lymph node metastasis (p<0.0001), and intraoperative blood loss (HR=1.775; 95% CI=1.008-3.126; p=0.046) were independent factors of poor prognosis.

Figure 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 3.

To assess the correlation between the cutoff value of PLR and overall survival in 121 patients, we performed ROC curve analysis. p=0.0016, AUC=0.64393. PLR, Platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio; ROC, receiver operating characteristic; AUC, area under the curve.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table III.

Characteristics of 121 patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy grouped by PLR.

Figure 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 4.

Kaplan–Meier curve analysis was performed to evaluate overall survival differences among 121 patients who received NAC. Patients were divided into two groups according to the PLR cutoff value of 169.6. Those with a PLR ≥169.6 (31%) exhibited worse overall survival than those with a PLR <169.6 (61%, p=0.0010). NAC, neoadjuvant chemotherapy; PLR, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table IV.

Univariate and multivariate analyses of prognostic factors for overall survival in 121 patients following neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Discussion

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to examine preoperative PLR as a prognostic factor in patients undergoing MIE and NAC who were using FP. Our findings are specific because all patients underwent MIE. Compared to findings of previous studies that describe post-thoracostomy esophagectomy, those of our study are novel. Inflammations in living bodies, such as breast tumors, play an important role in tumor proliferation and promotion of angiogenesis and metastasis (27). In addition, inflammation may be associated with the microenvironment where malignant cell growth is promoted (28, 29). Platelets produce various cytokines, such as vascular endothelial growth factors, which regulate angiogenesis (30, 31). Platelets, which are activated by inflammatory cells, can also promote neoplasm growth in endothelial cells (32). For example, in gastric cancer, research shows that platelets promote a malignant reaction to gastric cancer cells through direct contact between the epithelium and the mesenchyme (33). Therefore, the role of platelets in tumor growth, inflammation, and regeneration has become widely recognized.

Conversely, since 1863 it has been suggested that lymphoreticular cell infiltration may contribute to carcinogenesis at chronic inflammatory sites (34). Specific tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte subsets (TILs) influence tumor growth and regression (28). The impact of TILs has generally been investigated on several digestive organ tumors (35). However, few studies have examined the relationship between TILs and prognosis of esophageal cancers (36, 37).

Our study demonstrated that a higher PLR before NAC was related to poor immune function and poor prognosis. According to the CheckMate 577 trial, adjuvant therapy using nivolumab prolonged the disease-free survival in patients with resected gastroesophageal junctions or esophageal cancers who were treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (38). The significance of NAC for advanced ESCC has been recognized; however, there are few effective regimens (7). Therefore, it is important to identify novel biomarkers that may respond to chemotherapy or immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). Long-term results have demonstrated the efficacy of ICIs in patients with ESCC. PD-L1 tumor expression and TILs could also be useful for determining whether to introduce ICI therapy (39). Our results suggest that PLR may help predict the efficacy of NAC and ICIs. However, it is difficult to prognosticate using a single biomarker. Further studies are required to identify biomarkers in larger populations.

This study has several limitations. First, there was potential selection bias because the patients were retrospectively analyzed. Second, the study had a small sample size and was conducted at a single center. Therefore, a larger trial size, based on a bigger dataset, is needed to confirm our findings. Moreover, prospective studies should also be considered to improve these limitations.

Acknowledgements

We thank the members of the Department of Gastrointestinal surgery, Kobe University for their valuable insight and technical guidance.

Footnotes

  • Authors’ Contributions

    Takashi Kato, Taro Oshikiri, Hironobu Goto, and Yoshihiro Kakeji designed the study. Hitoshi Harada, Naoki Urakawa, and Shingo Kanaji interpreted the study data. Ryuichiro Sawada, Hiroshi Hasegawa, Kimihiro Yamashita, and Takeru Matsuda analyzed the data. All authors revised the report, commented on the manuscript, and approved the final report.

  • Conflicts of Interest

    The Authors declare no conflicts of interest.

  • Received January 12, 2022.
  • Revision received March 16, 2022.
  • Accepted March 23, 2022.
  • Copyright © 2022 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Smyth EC,
    2. Lagergren J,
    3. Fitzgerald RC,
    4. Lordick F,
    5. Shah MA,
    6. Lagergren P and
    7. Cunningham D
    : Oesophageal cancer. Nat Rev Dis Primers 3: 17048, 2017. PMID: 28748917. DOI: 10.1038/nrdp.2017.48
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Oshikiri T,
    2. Yasuda T,
    3. Harada H,
    4. Goto H,
    5. Oyama M,
    6. Hasegawa H,
    7. Ohara T,
    8. Sendo H,
    9. Nakamura T,
    10. Fujino Y,
    11. Tominaga M and
    12. Kakeji Y
    : A new method (the “Bascule method”) for lymphadenectomy along the left recurrent laryngeal nerve during prone esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Surg Endosc 29(8): 2442-2450, 2015. PMID: 25303923. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-014-3919-6
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Oshikiri T,
    2. Nakamura T,
    3. Miura Y,
    4. Yamamoto M,
    5. Kanaji S,
    6. Yamashita K,
    7. Matsuda T,
    8. Sumi Y,
    9. Suzuki S and
    10. Kakeji Y
    : A new method (the “Pincers maneuver”) for lymphadenectomy along the right recurrent laryngeal nerve during thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position for esophageal cancer. Surg Endosc 31(3): 1496-1504, 2017. PMID: 27492431. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-016-5124-2
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Oshikiri T,
    2. Takiguchi G,
    3. Miura S,
    4. Hasegawa H,
    5. Yamamoto M,
    6. Kanaji S,
    7. Yamashita K,
    8. Matsuda T,
    9. Nakamura T,
    10. Fujino Y,
    11. Tominaga M,
    12. Suzuki S and
    13. Kakeji Y
    : Medial approach for subcarinal lymphadenectomy during thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position. Langenbecks Arch Surg 404(3): 359-367, 2019. PMID: 30847598. DOI: 10.1007/s00423-019-01772-3
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Enzinger PC and
    2. Mayer RJ
    : Esophageal cancer. N Engl J Med 349(23): 2241-2252, 2003. PMID: 14657432. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMra035010
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Bray F,
    2. Ferlay J,
    3. Soerjomataram I,
    4. Siegel RL,
    5. Torre LA and
    6. Jemal A
    : Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 68(6): 394-424, 2018. PMID: 30207593. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21492
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Ando N,
    2. Kato H,
    3. Igaki H,
    4. Shinoda M,
    5. Ozawa S,
    6. Shimizu H,
    7. Nakamura T,
    8. Yabusaki H,
    9. Aoyama N,
    10. Kurita A,
    11. Ikeda K,
    12. Kanda T,
    13. Tsujinaka T,
    14. Nakamura K and
    15. Fukuda H
    : A randomized trial comparing postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil versus preoperative chemotherapy for localized advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus (JCOG9907). Ann Surg Oncol 19(1): 68-74, 2012. PMID: 21879261. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-011-2049-9
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Morita M,
    2. Yoshida R,
    3. Ikeda K,
    4. Egashira A,
    5. Oki E,
    6. Sadanaga N,
    7. Kakeji Y,
    8. Yamanaka T and
    9. Maehara Y
    : Advances in esophageal cancer surgery in Japan: an analysis of 1000 consecutive patients treated at a single institute. Surgery 143(4): 499-508, 2008. PMID: 18374047. DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2007.12.007
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Jamieson GG,
    2. Mathew G,
    3. Ludemann R,
    4. Wayman J,
    5. Myers JC and
    6. Devitt PG
    : Postoperative mortality following oesophagectomy and problems in reporting its rate. Br J Surg 91(8): 943-947, 2004. PMID: 15286953. DOI: 10.1002/bjs.4596
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Oshikiri T,
    2. Takiguchi G,
    3. Miura S,
    4. Takase N,
    5. Hasegawa H,
    6. Yamamoto M,
    7. Kanaji S,
    8. Yamashita K,
    9. Matsuda Y,
    10. Matsuda T,
    11. Nakamura T,
    12. Suzuki S and
    13. Kakeji Y
    : Current status of minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: Is it truly less invasive? Ann Gastroenterol Surg 3(2): 138-145, 2018. PMID: 30923783. DOI: 10.1002/ags3.12224
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Oshikiri T,
    2. Yasuda T,
    3. Kawasaki K,
    4. Harada H,
    5. Oyama M,
    6. Hasegawa H,
    7. Ohara T,
    8. Sendo H,
    9. Nakamura T,
    10. Fujino Y,
    11. Tominaga M and
    12. Kakeji Y
    : Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) is associated with less-restrictive ventilatory impairment and less risk for pulmonary complication than open laparotomy in thoracoscopic esophagectomy. Surgery 159(2): 459-466, 2016. PMID: 26361833. DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2015.07.026
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Veldkamp R,
    2. Kuhry E,
    3. Hop WC,
    4. Jeekel J,
    5. Kazemier G,
    6. Bonjer HJ,
    7. Haglind E,
    8. Påhlman L,
    9. Cuesta MA,
    10. Msika S,
    11. Morino M,
    12. Lacy AM and COlon cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection Study Group (COLOR)
    : Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 6(7): 477-484, 2005. PMID: 15992696. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(05)70221-7
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Kim HH,
    2. Hyung WJ,
    3. Cho GS,
    4. Kim MC,
    5. Han SU,
    6. Kim W,
    7. Ryu SW,
    8. Lee HJ and
    9. Song KY
    : Morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: an interim report – a phase III multicenter, prospective, randomized Trial (KLASS Trial). Ann Surg 251(3): 417-420, 2010. PMID: 20160637. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181cc8f6b
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Fridman WH,
    2. Galon J,
    3. Pagès F,
    4. Tartour E,
    5. Sautès-Fridman C and
    6. Kroemer G
    : Prognostic and predictive impact of intra- and peritumoral immune infiltrates. Cancer Res 71(17): 5601-5605, 2011. PMID: 21846822. DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-11-1316
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Kato T,
    2. Oshikiri T,
    3. Goto H,
    4. Urakawa N,
    5. Hasegawa H,
    6. Kanaji S,
    7. Yamashita K,
    8. Matsuda T,
    9. Nakamura T,
    10. Suzuki S and
    11. Kakeji Y
    : Preoperative neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio predicts the prognosis of esophageal squamous cell cancer patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. J Surg Oncol 124(7): 1022-1030, 2021. PMID: 34460103. DOI: 10.1002/jso.26611
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Carruthers R,
    2. Tho LM,
    3. Brown J,
    4. Kakumanu S,
    5. McCartney E and
    6. McDonald AC
    : Systemic inflammatory response is a predictor of outcome in patients undergoing preoperative chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal cancer. Colorectal Dis 14(10): e701-e707, 2012. PMID: 22731833. DOI: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2012.03147.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Hasegawa S,
    2. Eguchi H,
    3. Tomokuni A,
    4. Tomimaru Y,
    5. Asaoka T,
    6. Wada H,
    7. Hama N,
    8. Kawamoto K,
    9. Kobayashi S,
    10. Marubashi S,
    11. Konnno M,
    12. Ishii H,
    13. Mori M,
    14. Doki Y and
    15. Nagano H
    : Pre-treatment neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio as a predictive marker for pathological response to preoperative chemoradiotherapy in pancreatic cancer. Oncol Lett 11(2): 1560-1566, 2016. PMID: 26893780. DOI: 10.3892/ol.2015.4057
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Jung J,
    2. Park SY,
    3. Park SJ and
    4. Park J
    : Prognostic value of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio for overall and disease-free survival in patients with surgically treated esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Tumour Biol 37(6): 7149-7154, 2016. PMID: 26662960. DOI: 10.1007/s13277-015-4596-3
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Pang W,
    2. Lou N,
    3. Jin C,
    4. Hu C,
    5. Arvine C,
    6. Zhu G and
    7. Shen X
    : Combination of preoperative platelet/lymphocyte and neutrophil/lymphocyte rates and tumor-related factors to predict lymph node metastasis in patients with gastric cancer. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 28(5): 493-502, 2016. PMID: 26854795. DOI: 10.1097/MEG.0000000000000563
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Xie X,
    2. Luo KJ,
    3. Hu Y,
    4. Wang JY and
    5. Chen J
    : Prognostic value of preoperative platelet-lymphocyte and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio in patients undergoing surgery for esophageal squamous cell cancer. Dis Esophagus 29(1): 79-85, 2016. PMID: 25410116. DOI: 10.1111/dote.12296
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Varon D and
    2. Shai E
    : Platelets and their microparticles as key players in pathophysiological responses. J Thromb Haemost 13(Suppl 1): S40-S46, 2015. PMID: 26149049. DOI: 10.1111/jth.12976
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Pietramaggiori G,
    2. Scherer SS,
    3. Cervi D,
    4. Klement G and
    5. Orgill DP
    : Tumors stimulate platelet delivery of angiogenic factors in vivo: an unexpected benefit. Am J Pathol 173(6): 1609-1616, 2008. PMID: 18988799. DOI: 10.2353/ajpath.2008.080474
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Hajian-Tilaki K
    : Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for medical diagnostic test evaluation. Caspian J Intern Med 4(2): 627-635, 2013. PMID: 24009950.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  18. ↵
    1. Park SH,
    2. Goo JM and
    3. Jo CH
    : Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve: practical review for radiologists. Korean J Radiol 5(1): 11-18, 2004. PMID: 15064554. DOI: 10.3348/kjr.2004.5.1.11
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Brierley JD,
    2. Gospodarowicz MK and
    3. Wittekind C
    : TNM classification of malignant tumours. 8th edn. Oxford, Blackwell, 2017.
  20. ↵
    1. Dindo D,
    2. Demartines N and
    3. Clavien PA
    : Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240(2): 205-213, 2004. PMID: 15273542. DOI: 10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Mantovani A,
    2. Allavena P,
    3. Sica A and
    4. Balkwill F
    : Cancer-related inflammation. Nature 454(7203): 436-444, 2008. PMID: 18650914. DOI: 10.1038/nature07205
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. ↵
    1. Grivennikov SI,
    2. Greten FR and
    3. Karin M
    : Immunity, inflammation, and cancer. Cell 140(6): 883-899, 2010. PMID: 20303878. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2010.01.025
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    1. Yodying H,
    2. Matsuda A,
    3. Miyashita M,
    4. Matsumoto S,
    5. Sakurazawa N,
    6. Yamada M and
    7. Uchida E
    : Prognostic significance of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio in oncologic outcomes of esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 23(2): 646-654, 2016. PMID: 26416715. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-015-4869-5
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. Pintucci G,
    2. Froum S,
    3. Pinnell J,
    4. Mignatti P,
    5. Rafii S and
    6. Green D
    : Trophic effects of platelets on cultured endothelial cells are mediated by platelet-associated fibroblast growth factor-2 (FGF-2) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). Thromb Haemost 88(5): 834-842, 2002. PMID: 12428103.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  25. ↵
    1. Sheu JR,
    2. Fong TH,
    3. Liu CM,
    4. Shen MY,
    5. Chen TL,
    6. Chang Y,
    7. Lu MS and
    8. Hsiao G
    : Expression of matrix metalloproteinase-9 in human platelets: regulation of platelet activation in in vitro and in vivo studies. Br J Pharmacol 143(1): 193-201, 2004. PMID: 15289295. DOI: 10.1038/sj.bjp.0705917
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    1. Schmitt-Sody M,
    2. Metz P,
    3. Gottschalk O,
    4. Birkenmaier C,
    5. Zysk S,
    6. Veihelmann A and
    7. Jansson V
    : Platelet P-selectin is significantly involved in leukocyte-endothelial cell interaction in murine antigen-induced arthritis. Platelets 18(5): 365-372, 2007. PMID: 17654306. DOI: 10.1080/09537100701191315
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. ↵
    1. Saito R,
    2. Shoda K,
    3. Maruyama S,
    4. Yamamoto A,
    5. Takiguchi K,
    6. Furuya S,
    7. Hosomura N,
    8. Akaike H,
    9. Kawaguchi Y,
    10. Amemiya H,
    11. Kawaida H,
    12. Sudo M,
    13. Inoue S,
    14. Kono H,
    15. Suzuki-Inoue K and
    16. Ichikawa D
    : Platelets enhance malignant behaviours of gastric cancer cells via direct contacts. Br J Cancer 124(3): 570-573, 2021. PMID: 33110200. DOI: 10.1038/s41416-020-01134-7
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. ↵
    1. Balkwill F and
    2. Mantovani A
    : Inflammation and cancer: back to Virchow? Lancet 357(9255): 539-545, 2001. PMID: 11229684. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04046-0
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. ↵
    1. Gooden MJ,
    2. de Bock GH,
    3. Leffers N,
    4. Daemen T and
    5. Nijman HW
    : The prognostic influence of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes in cancer: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Br J Cancer 105(1): 93-103, 2011. PMID: 21629244. DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2011.189
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. ↵
    1. Dutta S,
    2. Crumley AB,
    3. Fullarton GM,
    4. Horgan PG and
    5. McMillan DC
    : Comparison of the prognostic value of tumour- and patient-related factors in patients undergoing potentially curative resection of oesophageal cancer. World J Surg 35(8): 1861-1866, 2011. PMID: 21538187. DOI: 10.1007/s00268-011-1130-7
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. ↵
    1. Crumley AB,
    2. Going JJ,
    3. Hilmy M,
    4. Dutta S,
    5. Tannahill C,
    6. McKernan M,
    7. Edwards J,
    8. Stuart RC and
    9. McMillan DC
    : Interrelationships between tumor proliferative activity, leucocyte and macrophage infiltration, systemic inflammatory response, and survival in patients selected for potentially curative resection for gastroesophageal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 18(9): 2604-2612, 2011. PMID: 21409484. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-011-1658-7
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. ↵
    1. Kelly RJ,
    2. Ajani JA,
    3. Kuzdzal J,
    4. Zander T,
    5. Van Cutsem E,
    6. Piessen G,
    7. Mendez G,
    8. Feliciano J,
    9. Motoyama S,
    10. Lièvre A,
    11. Uronis H,
    12. Elimova E,
    13. Grootscholten C,
    14. Geboes K,
    15. Zafar S,
    16. Snow S,
    17. Ko AH,
    18. Feeney K,
    19. Schenker M,
    20. Kocon P,
    21. Zhang J,
    22. Zhu L,
    23. Lei M,
    24. Singh P,
    25. Kondo K,
    26. Cleary JM,
    27. Moehler M and CheckMate 577 Investigators
    : Adjuvant nivolumab in resected esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer. N Engl J Med 384(13): 1191-1203, 2021. PMID: 33789008. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2032125
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. ↵
    1. Kato K,
    2. Tahara M,
    3. Hironaka S,
    4. Muro K,
    5. Takiuchi H,
    6. Hamamoto Y,
    7. Imamoto H,
    8. Amano N and
    9. Seriu T
    : A phase II study of paclitaxel by weekly 1-h infusion for advanced or recurrent esophageal cancer in patients who had previously received platinum-based chemotherapy. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 67(6): 1265-1272, 2011. PMID: 20703479. DOI: 10.1007/s00280-010-1422-x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Anticancer Research: 42 (5)
Anticancer Research
Vol. 42, Issue 5
May 2022
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Anticancer Research.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Impact of the Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio as a Biomarker for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Anticancer Research
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Anticancer Research web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
6 + 7 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Impact of the Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio as a Biomarker for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma
TAKASHI KATO, TARO OSHIKIRI, HIRONOBU GOTO, RYUICHIRO SAWADA, HITOSHI HARADA, NAOKI URAKAWA, HIROSHI HASEGAWA, SHINGO KANAJI, KIMIHIRO YAMASHITA, TAKERU MATSUDA, YOSHIHIRO KAKEJI
Anticancer Research May 2022, 42 (5) 2775-2782; DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.15757

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Reprints and Permissions
Share
Impact of the Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio as a Biomarker for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma
TAKASHI KATO, TARO OSHIKIRI, HIRONOBU GOTO, RYUICHIRO SAWADA, HITOSHI HARADA, NAOKI URAKAWA, HIROSHI HASEGAWA, SHINGO KANAJI, KIMIHIRO YAMASHITA, TAKERU MATSUDA, YOSHIHIRO KAKEJI
Anticancer Research May 2022, 42 (5) 2775-2782; DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.15757
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Patients and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgements
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Clinical Significance of Pre-treatment Circumferential Tumor Location in Patients With cStage IB-III Esophageal Squamous Cell Cancer
  • Usefulness of Nutrition and Inflammation Assessment Tools in Esophageal Cancer Treatment
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Assessment of Breakthrough Cancer Pain Among Female Patients With Cancer: Knowledge, Management and Characterization in the IOPS-MS Study
  • Low-dose Apalutamide in Non-metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer: A Case Series
  • Bone Toxicity Case Report Combining Encorafenib, Cetuximab and WNT974 in a Phase I Trial
Show more Clinical Studies

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Biomarker
  • Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
  • platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio
Anticancer Research

© 2025 Anticancer Research

Powered by HighWire