Open Access

Prognostic value of inflammation‑based indexes for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma following curative resection

  • Authors:
    • Yunhua Wu
    • Fenggang Ren
    • Yichao Chai
    • Zhao Xue
    • Cong Shen
    • Xufeng Zhang
    • Yi Lv
    • Liangshuo Hu
  • View Affiliations

  • Published online on: October 24, 2018     https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2018.9618
  • Pages: 165-174
  • Copyright: © Wu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )


Abstract

It is widely acknowledged that inflammatory indices may serve as effective prognosis indicators for various malignancies. In the present study, the prognostic value of systemic inflammatory biomarkers for patients undergoing curative resection for intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma (ICC) was investigated. Clinical data of ICC patients who underwent curative resection between September 2008 and July 2017 were collected. Inflammatory indictors were analyzed using the Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve. Indictors that were significantly associated with the overall survival (OS) were used to establish a systemic inflammation‑based score system and tested via nomogram using R software. The neutrophil To lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and lymphocyte to macrophages ratio (LMR) were significantly associated with the OS and disease‑free survival of the patients. High NLR and low LMR were associated with worse clinicopathological and survival outcomes. The univariate and multivariate analyses indicated that tumor T stage, incisal margin, NLR and LMR were associated with the OS of the patients. The systemic inflammation‑based scoring system based on LMR and NLR demonstrated a stronger discriminatory capacity and may serve as a useful prognostic parameter for patients undergoing curative resection for ICC. Low LMR and high NLR were observed to be associated with poor prognosis and worse clinical outcomes for patients with ICC undergoing curative surgery. A combined inflammation‑based scoring system based on LMR and NLR may effectively predict the outcomes and serve as a novel prognostic predictor for these patients.

Introduction

Primary liver cancer is one of the most common malignant tumors in the world, with particularly high incidence rates in Asia and Africa (1,2). It is the third leading cause of cancer-associated mortality worldwide (3). The major histopathologic types of liver cancer include hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and intrahepatic cholangiocellular carcinoma (ICC) (2,4). Although various methods have been implemented to improve the survival of patients with liver cancer, including surgical resection, liver transplantation, transarterial chemoembolization, local ablation, radiotherapy, chemotherapy and molecular targeted drug treatment, the prognosis remains poor, particularly for ICC (58).

ICC is the second most common malignancy worldwide and accounts for 15–20% of primary liver cancer (9). Due to its rising incidence and poor prognosis, research into ICC is receiving increasing attention (10,11). Surgical resection remains one of the most effective ways to treat ICC (12,13). However, the clinical outcomes are limited due to the high recurrence and metastasis rates following operation (14). Thus, effective indicators that may predict the prognosis of ICC are essential for the treatment of these patients.

Previous studies have demonstrated that inflammation serves an important role in the development and progression of liver cancer (15,16). It has previously been demonstrated that a number of inflammation-based indicators in the blood are associated with the prognosis of HCC, such as the Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS), the systemic inflammation score, the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR), the lymphocyte to monocyte ratio (LMR), the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), prognostic nutritional index (PNI), prognostic index and red cell distribution width (RDW) (3,1719). In addition, there are various serum enzyme-associated parameters that have been found to be associated with the clinical outcomes of ICC, including the gamma-glutamyltransferase to platelet ratio (GPR), albumin (ALB) to alkaline phosphatase ratio (APPR), γ-glutamyltransferase to alanine aminotransferase ratio (GAR) and the ALB to γ-glutamyltransferase ratio (AGR) (20,21). However, few studies have considered the prognostic significance of serum inflammatory-based indicators for ICC.

The aims of the present retrospective analysis were to investigate the association between inflammation-based prognostic indicators and the survival of patients undergoing curative surgical resection for ICC.

Materials and methods

Patients

For this retrospective cohort study, 221 patients who were pathologically diagnosed with ICC in the First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University (Xi'an, China) between September 2008 and July 2017 were retrospectively recruited. Patients with active hepatitis, parasitic infection, acute cholangitis or other malignant tumors were excluded. Ultimately, 123 patients following curative resection were enrolled into the study. The institutional ethics committee at the study center approved this study. All participants gave consent after being fully informed of the goal and characteristics of this research.

Treatment and follow-up

Blood tests and computed tomography (CT) scans were routinely performed as preoperative tests within 3 days prior to surgery. The clinical staging was based on The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 8th Edition Cancer Staging System (22). Each patient was followed-up at least every 2 months following hospital discharge during the first year and every 3 months thereafter. The final follow-up date was September 30th, 2017.

Demographics and clinical characteristic data

All clinical data were collected from the patients' medical records in the department of Hepatobiliary Surgery of the First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University. Clinical data included age, gender, tumor size, number of nodules and presence or absence of vascular invasion. Furthermore, preoperative biochemical indices were measured, including white blood cell counts (WBC), platelet counts (PLT), neutrophil counts, lymphocyte counts, megakaryocyte counts, RDW, α-fetoprotein (AFP) levels, alanine transaminase (ALT) levels, aspartate aminotransferase (AST) levels, total bilirubin (TBIL) levels, indirect bilirubin (IBIL) levels, alkaline phosphatase (ALP) levels, ALB levels, hepatitis B surface antigen (HbsAg) levels and hepatitis B virus deoxyribonucleic acid (HBV-DNA) load. NLR was defined as the neutrophil count/lymphocyte count ratio; dNLR was calculated by neutrophil count/(WBC-neutrophil counts) ratio; LMR was defined as the lymphocyte count/megakaryocyte count ratio; PLR was defined as the platelet count/lymphocyte count ratio; PNI was defined as ALB + (5× lymphocyte count). The primary endpoints of this study were overall survival time (OS) and disease-free survival time (DFS). OS was defined as the time between radical surgery and mortality. DFS was defined as the time between radical surgery and tumor recurrence.

Statistical methods

Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 18.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Continuous data are presented as the mean ± standard deviation and were compared using a unpaired Student's t-test or one-way analysis of variance for normal distribution data with Fisher's LSD post hoc test for the comparison of among different groups, Kruskal-Wallis test was used for multi-group comparison of abnormal distribution. The categorical variables were compared using a χ2 test and a Fisher's exact test. The diagnostic accuracy of all the indicators was determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. Indicators that displayed significance ere chosen for the next part of the study and the Youden's index was applied to determine the optimal cut-off values (22). Patients were divided into different groups according to these aforementioned cut-off values. Univariate analysis of variables associated with survival was performed using log-rank testing to evaluate clinical factors associated with OS. Multivariate analysis was performed using Cox proportional hazards regression modelling using backward elimination and likelihood ratio testing, and the included variables were those which had significant associations with OS, determined by the univariate analysis. The inflammation-based scoring system was defined as follows: Patients with high NLR and high LMR were assigned a score of 2; patients with high NLR and low LMR or low NLR and high LMR were assigned as score of 1; patients who had low NLR and LMR were assigned a score of 0. Patients were grouped according to this score. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze the long-term effect of the different groups and these were compared using the log-rank test. Finally, nomograms were used to validate the outcomes. Nomograms for possible prognostic factors associated with OS were using R software 3.4.0 (Institute for Statistics and Mathematics, Vienna, Austria). and the model performance for predicting outcome was evaluated by Harrell's concordance index (c-index), as previously described (23). P<0.05 was considered to indicate a statistically significant difference.

Results

Patients' characteristics

A total of 123 patients were recruited to the present study, who had been pathologically diagnosed with ICC and undergone radical resection between September 2008 and July 2017, including 67 males and 56 females. The mean age of the patients was 56.80±10.67 (29–79) years old. The final follow-up date was September 30th, 2017. The median follow-up time was 29.1 months (2–64 months). Following analysis with the Area Under the ROC curve (AUROC), NLR and LMR only were found to be significantly associated with the OS of patients (Fig. 1, data for indictors which were not associated with OS not presented). The optimal cut-off value of OS for LMR and NLR was 3.42 and 2.05, respectively.

According to the cut-off value of NLR and LMR, the cohort was divided into lower and higher groups as presented in Table I. Higher NLR was observed to be associated with a higher ratio of male patients, larger tumor diameter, higher lymph node metastasis rate and increased white blood cell and megakaryocyte counts. Lower LMR was associated with larger tumor diameter, higher lymph node metastasis rate, increased numbers of patients at tumor stage 3–4 (T3-4) and Tumor, Node, Metastasis (TNM) stage 3–4, lower ALB levels and increased megakaryocyte counts.

Table I.

Associations between clinical characteristics of NLR and LMR.

Table I.

Associations between clinical characteristics of NLR and LMR.

ParameterNLR≤2.05 (n=25)NLR>2.05 (n=98)P-valueLMR≤3.42 (n=57)LMR>3.42 (n=66)P-value
Age, yearb56.08±11.8156.99±10.420.70556.58±11.0657.00±10.410.828
Sex (male/female)8/1759/390.011a32/2535/310.730
BMI, kg/m2 b23.00±4.2423.13±3.700.87822.50±3.9123.63±3.640.101
Tumor diameter, cmb4.81±2.636.46±3.180.018a6.86±3.185.48±2.980.015a
Differentiated (well/poorly)17/853/450.15228/2942/240.105
Incisal margin (negative/positive)13/1263/350.25934/2342/240.650
N (−/+)22/353/450.002a25/3250/160.000a
T (1–2/3-4)17/851/470.15225/3243/230.018a
TNM stage (I–II/III–IV)11/1427/710.11210/4728/380.003a
Vascular invasion (absent/present)18/763/350.46834/2347/190.177
WBC count, ×103/mlb5.75±2.237.19±2.710.015a7.37±2.866.49±2.470.071
Platelet count, ×103/mlb178.96±83.70198.01±93.650.356201.40±82.81187.86±98.960.416
Albumin, g/dlb39.05±5.1438.07±5.830.45536.58±5.2139.73±5.720.002a
Neutrophil count, ×103/mlb6.51±14.334.82±2.180.5625.13±2.465.20±8.860.952
Lymphocyte count, ×103/mlb2.38±5.231.47±0.520.3911.36±0.451.91±3.230.203
Megakaryocyte count, ×103/mlb0.33±0.170.48±0.210.001a0.54±0.220.37±0.170.000a
TBIL, mmol/lb32.92±57.4238.12±68.620.72837.57±65.6736.62±67.360.937
AST, U/lb66.62±61.00133.21±659.630.616163.25±798.8569.23±106.150.380
ALT, U/lb68.20±68.92131.17±545.370.567152.14±652.1579.28±148.610.411
AFP, ng/mlb12.34±40.5631.37±157.130.5513.16 (1.21–1,440)3.11(1.22–420)0.563
CA-199 kU/l (median)34.04 (0.6–10,000)185 (7.74–10,000)0.065185 (3.55–10,000)61(0.6–10,000)0.001
GGT, U/lb162.61±187.45241.74±347.260.275251.52±396.68195.71±204.480.320
Child-plug score (A,B/C)19/668/300.51737/2050/160.187

a P<0.05

b mean±standard deviation. NLR, neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio; LMR, lymphocyte to macrophage ratio; BMI, body mass index; TNM, Tumor, Node, Metastasis; WBC, white blood cell; TBIL, total bilirubin levels; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AFP, α-fetoprotein; CA-199, cancer antigen 199; GGT, γ-glutamyltransferase.

Survival outcomes

The 1-year and 3-year OS for the whole cohort were 37.40 and 5.69%, respectively. The median OS was 9 months. Higher NLR was associated with poor OS and decreased DFS. Patients with higher LMR exhibited higher 3-year OS and 3-year DFS (Fig. 2).

The univariate analysis of OS-associated indicators are presented in Table II. Tumor diameter, degree of tumor differentiation, lymph node metastasis, resection margin, T stages, TNM stage, vascular invasion, NLR, LMR and macrophage counts were found to be associated with the OS for the cohort. In order to exclude the colinear regression amongst the related factors, TNM stages were not included in the multivariate analysis. The results showed that the T stage, resection margin, NLR and LMR were significantly associated with the OS of patients with ICC.

Table II.

Univariate and Multivariate analysis of the clinical characteristic factors associated with OS.

Table II.

Univariate and Multivariate analysis of the clinical characteristic factors associated with OS.

Univariate analysisMultivariate analysis


ParameterP-valueHR95% CIP-valueHR95% CI
Age (years)
  <60; ≥600.5881.1450.701–1.872
Sex
  Male; female0.4590.8290.504–1.362
BMI (kg/m2)
  <24; ≥240.6150.8790.532–1.452
Tumor diameter
  <5 cm; ≥5 cm0.031a1.7731.053–2.9840.7881.0870.592–1.996
Differentiated
  Well; poorly0.036a0.5890.359–0.9670.1470.6750.397–1.148
Incisal margin
  Negative; positive0.010a2.0361.184–3.5020.190a2.1321.132–4.016
N
  N-; N+0.007a1.9901.204–3.2880.0911.6420.924–2.918
T
  T1-2; T3-40.006a2.0271.228–3.3470.014a2.0151.155–3.516
TNM stage
  1; 2; 3; 40.003a1.6051.179–2.185NANANAb
Vascular invasion
  Yes; No0.017a1.8631.117–3.1050.3621.3160.729–2.374
NLR
  ≤2.05: >2.050.031a1.0291.003–1.0550.046a1.0331.001–1.067
LMR
  ≤3.42; >3.420.000a0.6860.547–0.8190.023a0.7890.643–0.968
WBC count (×103/ml)0.0561.0930.998–1.197
Platelet count (×103/ml)
  <100; ≥1000.2531.4940.751–2.973
Albumin (g/dl)
  <35; ≥350.3630.7780.453–1.337
Neutrophil count (×103/ml)0.6851.0110.964–1.060
Lymphocyte count (×103/ml)0.7691.0200.896–1.161
Macrophages count (×103/ml)0.009a4.1731.435–12.1330.2792.0640.556–7.665
TBIL (mmol/l)
  <20.5; ≥20.50.4411.2230.733–2.038
AST (U/l)
  <45; ≥450.5800.8660.520–1.433
ALT (U/l)
  <45; ≥450.2960.7560.447–1.278
AFP (ng/ml)
  <400; ≥4000.4031.2970.705–2.386
CA-199 (kU/l)
  <35; ≥350.7890.9280.537–1.603
Child-plug score
  A; B; C0.4221.2070.763–1.911
ALP (U/l)
  <100; ≥1000.2491.3570.808–2.278
GGT (U/l)
  <50; ≥500.2771.3700.777–2.414

a P<0.05.

b TNM stages were excluded to avoid the influence of colinear regression. OS, overall survival; NLR, neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio; LMR, lymphocyte to macrophage ratio; BMI, body mass index; TNM, Tumor, Node, Metastasis; WBC, white blood cell; TBIL, total bilirubin levels; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AFP, α-fetoprotein; CA-199, cancer antigen 199; GGT, γ-glutamyltransferase; CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio.

To comprehensively evaluate the association between the inflammation-based score and the OS, patients were divided into three groups: Score 0 group (n=23); score 1 group (n=44); and score 2 group (n=56). The ROC analysis was used to determine the discriminatory capacity of the NLR, LMR and inflammation-based score system, as presented in Fig. 3A. The AUROC of NLR, LMR and the inflammation-based scoring system was 0.645, 0.299 and 0.724, respectively. When comparing the OS and DFS rates of different groups based on the inflammation-based score system, patients in the higher score group had worse prognosis, as presented in Fig. 3B and C.

The clinical characteristics of different inflammatory-based score groups were further compared. The three groups exhibited differences in the tumor diameter, incisal margin, lymph node metastasis, T stage, TNM stage, serum ALB level, white blood cell count, and lymphocyte and megakaryocyte counts (Table III).

Table III.

Association between clinical characteristics and the inflammation-based scoring system.

Table III.

Association between clinical characteristics and the inflammation-based scoring system.

Inflammation score

Parameter0 N=231 N=442 N=56P-value
Ages, yearsf55.65±12.2158.05±9.2556.30±11.150.615
Sex (male/female)8/1526/1833/230.110
BMI, kg/m2 f23.12±4.4123.87±3.1622.51±3.940.208
Tumor diameter, cmf 4.83±2.70d5.83±3.05 6.88±3.21d0.023a
Differentiated (well/poorly)15/827/1728/280.351
Incisal margin (negative/positive)20/329/1527/290.004a
N (−/+)19/431/1325/310.002a
T (1–2/3-4)15/829/1524/320.040a
TNM stage (I–II/III–IV)11/1219/258/480.001a
Vascular invasion (absent/present)17/630/1434/220.490
WBC count, ×103/mlf 5.57±2.22c,d 6.99±2.44c 7.38±2.89d0.022a
Platelet count, ×103/mlf178.17±87.22191.00±103.41203.16±83.990.528
Albumin, g/dlf39.87±4.0239.06±6.8336.99±5.070.064
Neutrophil count, ×103/mlf 2.45±5.46d4.40±1.57 5.17±2.49d0.007a
Lymphocyte count, ×103/mlf 2.85±6.35c,d 1.64±0.55c 1.34±0.44d0.012a
Megakaryocyte, ×103/mlf 0.31±0.17d 0.40±0.16e 0.54±0.22d,e0.000a
TBIL, mmol/lf25.57±43.0945.99±85.1634.77±61.130.463
AST, U/lf59.97±57.2880.69±123.9567.69±106.110.716
ALT, U/lf64.86±69.91196.06±796.5679.31±149.860.420
AFP, ng/mlf3.06 (1.41–206.00) 3.12(1.22–420.66) 3.16(1.21–1,440)0.555b
CA-199, kU/l (median)44.08 (0.6–10,000) 95.11(0.8–10,000) 185(3.55–10,000)0.697b
GGT, U/lf154.49±182.39290.97±458.74203.54±215.420.204
Child-plug score (A, B/C)20/330/1437/190.161

a P<0.05.

b Kruskal-Wallis test. BMI, body mass index; TNM, Tumor, Node, Metastasis; WBC, white blood cell; TBIL, total bilirubin levels; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AFP, α-fetoprotein; CA-199, cancer antigen 199; GGT, γ-glutamyltransferase.

c Represent group Inflammation score 0 has significance with group Inflammation score 1

d represent group Inflammation score 0 has significance with group Inflammation score 3

e represent group Inflammation score 1 has significance with group Inflammation score 2.

f Mean±standard deviation.

To verify the results, a nomogram was established, using the indicators that were significantly associated with the OS. The results were identified to be the same as those for the Cox regression analysis (Fig. 4A). The Harrell's c-indexes of the nomograms for prediction of the OS of patients with ICC were 0.74 (95% CI: 0.677–0.803). Calibration curves for 1-year, 2-year and 3-year nomograms (Fig 4B-D) revealed no deviations from the reference line and no need for recalibration. Thus, the nomogram verified that the NLR and LMR may serve as effective indicators for the prognosis of ICC.

Discussion

Inflammation has long been reported to be associated with the development and progression of liver cancer (24). Inflammation may contribute to the cancer microenvironment and promote the proliferation of cancer cells (25,26). The cell-mediated componenet of the immune system serves an important role in the immune response to a tumor. Levels of peripheral blood cells, such as WBCs, neutrophils granulocytes and lymphocytes, may reflect the inflammatory status of patients (27). It has previously been reported that high numbers of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes correlate with better prognosis in patients with breast cancer (28). Neutrophils are capable of producing cytokines and chemokines, including vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), which may promote tumor angiogenesis and cancer cell proliferation, whilst acting to suppress lymphocyte-mediated cytolysis (29,30). Furthermore, megakaryocyte and platelet numbers have been reported to be associated with a cancer-promoting environment. Increasing evidence has demonstrated that serum inflammatory indicators, such as NLR, PLR, LMR, RDW and PNI, are associated with the prognosis of various cancer types (3,19,31,32).

Although the association between inflammatory-based indicators and HCC has been extensively studied, little is known about the usefulness of these indicators in ICC. In the present study, it was revealed that NLR, LMR and the inflammation-based score based on these may serve as useful indicators in the prognosis of patients with ICC. Patients with lower LMR, higher NLR or higher inflammation scores may have worse pathological and clinical outcomes.

NLR as a prognostic factor for liver cancer has been widely reported (3335). It was demonstrated to be associated with worse clinicopathological characteristics and it is also been reported to be an independent predictor of long-term survival for various malignant tumors (32,33,35,36). In the present study, the optimal cut-off value of NLR was 2.05. In the multivariate analysis, the hazard ratio was 1.033 (95% CI, 1.001–1.067; P<0.05), which is concordant with previous studies (17,37). Patients with higher NLR exhibited tumors of larger diameters and at more advanced stages, which is consistent with previous studies (3,38,39).

LMR is a favorable prognostic factor for clinical outcomes in patients with HCC (24). In the present study it has been identified that LMR is also associated with the prognosis of ICC. Lymphocytes and monocytes are vital for the development and prognosis of various cancer types and are involved in the development of tumors through the release of various soluble factors, which may be essential for tumor angiogenesis, invasion and metastasis (40,41). In the present study, lower LMR was demonstrated to be associated with worse prognostic and clinical outcomes. Although studies have previously reported LMR to be an independent factor for HCC, this is, to the best of our knowledge, the first evidence to suggest that lower LMR correlates with worse prognosis, therefore may be a potential clinical indicator for patients with ICC (24,42).

The current study identified NLR and LMR to be better predictors compared with other inflammatory indicators for patients with ICC. By combining the two indicators together, it was discovered that the prognostic significance of the inflammatory-based system was improved compared with the simple use of a single index. With AUROC analysis, this inflammatory model had a stronger predictive ability compared with NLR or LMR alone. On the basis of this inflammatory score model, it was also discovered that the higher scoring groups had worse prognostic and clinicopathological outcomes.

Many studies have reported γ-glutamyl transferase (GGT)-associated enzymes, including AGR, GPR and GAR, along with other indicators such as PNI, to be associated with the prognosis of ICC (20,43,44). However, the present study demonstrated that these parameters were not significantly associated with the prognosis of ICC. This may be due to the fact that the tumors of the enrolled patients were at a later stage compared with previous studies. The patients in this cohort displaced high serum GGT levels and low serum PNI levels. High GGT levels may reflect disorders of the bile tract whilst low PNI may reflect the nutrition state of the patient, however these indicators may not be suitable as OS predictors for patients in the later tumor stage.

Currently, a lot of studies have established various nomograms using the risk factors for the survival and recurrence of the ICC patients (9). In 2013, Wang et al (45) established a nomogram using preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen levels and carbohydrate antigen19-9 levels, tumor size, presence or absence of vascular invasion, nodal status and direct invasion or local metastasis in a cohort of 367 ICC Asian patients. Furthermore, in 2014, Hyder et al (46) built a nomogram from a cohort of 514 patients from 13 Western and Eastern centers, in which the patients' age, tumor size, number of lesions, nodal status, vascular invasion status and presence of absence of underlying cirrhotic liver parenchyma were included. These two studies may predict the prognosis of patients with ICC and Doussot et al (47) verified this in 2015. This present study focused chiefly on the inflammation indicators for the prognosis of ICC and nomograms were used to verify the results. However, internal validation using the calibration curves and c-index demonstrated that the nomogram established in the present study was comparable with previous studies.

The present study poses a number of limitations. Firstly, the results were based on a single center retrospective study, which may generate biases in the data analysis. Secondly, two systems were established: The nomograms and the systemic inflammation-based system. Whilst these may effectively predict the prognosis of patients with ICC, the present study was unable to establish which one was superior. Thirdly, owing to the limited number of patients, further indicators, including GPS were not measured; hence, a full assessment of inflammatory indicators for ICC was not able to be made.

In the present study, it was demonstrated that low LMR and high NLR are associated with poor prognosis and worse clinical outcomes for patients with ICC undergoing curative surgery. A combined inflammation-based score system based on LMR and NLR may effectively predict the outcomes and serve as a novel prognostic predictor for these patients.

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

This study was supported by the Project of Development and Innovation Team of Ministry of Education (grant no. IRT_16R57).

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Authors' contributions

YW, YL and LH conceived and designed the experiments. YW, FR and ZX acquired data and performed statistical analysis. FR, YL, YC and CS interpreted the data. YW, LH, XZ and CS wrote the manuscript. XZ and YL revised the manuscript. XZ was involved in the acquisition of data. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The institutional ethics committee at the study center approved this study. All participants gave consent after being fully informed of the goal and characteristics of this research.

Patient consent for publication

Written informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to publication.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

1 

Nautsch F, Ludwig JM, Xing M, Johnson KM and Kim HS: Racial disparities and sociodemographic differences in incidence and survival among pediatric patients in the United States with primary liver cancer: A surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) population study. J Clin Gastroenterol. 52:262–267. 2018.PubMed/NCBI

2 

Xu K, Watanabe-Galloway S, Rochling FA, Zhang J, Farazi PA, Peng H, Wang H and Luo J: Practice, knowledge, and barriers for screening of hepatocellular carcinoma among high-risk chinese patients. Ann Glob Health. 83:281–292. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

3 

He CB and Lin XJ: Inflammation scores predict the survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who were treated with transarterial chemoembolization and recombinant human type-5 adenovirus H101. PLoS One. 12:e01747692017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

4 

Hsu CS and Kao JH: An update on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis in Asia. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 11:759–772. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

5 

Erstad DJ and Tanabe KK: Hepatocellular carcinoma: Early-stage management challenges. J Hepatocell Carcinoma. 4:81–92. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

6 

Lee SJ and Lim HY: Hepatocellular carcinoma treatment: A comparative review of emerging growth factor receptor antagonists. Expert Opin Emerg Drugs. 22:191–200. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

7 

Rabinel P, Dousse D, Muscari F and Suc B: Management of liver cancer. The Surgeon's point of view. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother. 22:176–180. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

8 

Rai V, Abdo J, Alsuwaidan AN, Agrawal S, Sharma P and Agrawal DK: Cellular and molecular targets for the immunotherapy of hepatocellular carcinoma. Mol Cell Biochem. 437:13–36. 2018. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

9 

Jeong S, Cheng Q, Huang L, Wang J, Sha M, Tong Y, Xia L, Han L, Xi Z, Zhang J, et al: Risk stratification system to predict recurrence of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma after hepatic resection. BMC Cancer. 17:4642017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

10 

Zhu Y, Cai F, Zhao J and Liu F: Prognostic risk factors associated with recurrence and metastasis after radical resection in patients with hepatolithiasis complicated by intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Cell Biochem Biophys. 73:455–460. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

11 

Ni Q, Shen W, Zhang M, Yang C, Cai W, Wu M and Yang J: Prognostic analysis of radical resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: A retrospective cohort study. Oncotarget. 8:75627–75637. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

12 

Maganty K, Levi D, Moon J, Bejarano PA, Arosemena L, Tzakis A and Martin P: Combined hepatocellular carcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: Outcome after liver transplantation. Dig Dis Sci. 55:3597–3601. 2010. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

13 

Elshamy M, Presser N, Hammad AY, Firl DJ, Coppa C, Fung J and Aucejo FN: Liver transplantation in patients with incidental hepatocellular carcinoma/cholangiocarcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: A single-center experience. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 16:264–270. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

14 

Chinchilla-Lopez P, Aguilar-Olivos NE, Garcia-Gomez J, Hernández-Alejandro KK, Chablé-Montero F, Motola-Kuba D, Patel T and Méndez-Sánchez N: Prevalence, risk factors, and survival of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Ann Hepatol. 16:565–568. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

15 

Hanahan D and Weinberg RA: Hallmarks of cancer: The next generation. Cell. 144:646–674. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

16 

Tarocchi M, Polvani S, Marroncini G and Galli A: Molecular mechanism of hepatitis B virus-induced hepatocarcinogenesis. World J Gastroenterol. 20:11630–11640. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

17 

Song W, Wang K, Zhong FP, Fan YW, Peng L and Zou SB: Clinicopathological and prognostic significance of platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Oncotarget. 7:81830–81838. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

18 

Fu SJ, Ji F, Han M, Chen MG, Wang XP, Ju WQ, Zhao Q, Wu LW, Ren QQ, Guo ZY, et al: Prognostic value of combined preoperative fibrinogen and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after liver transplantation. Oncotarget. 8:4301–4312. 2017.PubMed/NCBI

19 

Howell J, Pinato DJ, Ramaswami R, Arizumi T, Ferrari C, Gibbin A, Burlone ME, Guaschino G, Toniutto P, Black J, et al: Integration of the cancer-related inflammatory response as a stratifying biomarker of survival in hepatocellular carcinoma treated with sorafenib. Oncotarget. 8:36161–36170. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

20 

Jing CY, Fu YP, Shen HJ, Zheng SS, Lin JJ, Yi Y, Huang JL, Xu X, Zhang J, Zhou J, et al: Albumin to gamma-glutamyltransferase ratio as a prognostic indicator in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma after curative resection. Oncotarget. 8:13293–13303. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

21 

Okuno M, Ebata T, Yokoyama Y, Igami T, Sugawara G, Mizuno T, Yamaguchi J and Nagino M: Evaluation of inflammation-based prognostic scores in patients undergoing hepatobiliary resection for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. J Gastroenterol. 51:153–161. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

22 

Meng ZW, Pan W, Hong HJ, Chen JZ and Chen YL: Modified staging classification for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma based on the sixth and seventh editions of the AJCC/UICC TNM staging systems. Medicine (Baltimore). 96:e78912017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

23 

Li Y, Jia H, Yu W, Xu Y, Li X, Li Q and Cai S: Nomograms for predicting prognostic value of inflammatory biomarkers in colorectal cancer patients after radical resection. Int J Cancer. 139:220–231. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

24 

Shi S, Chen Q, Ye L, Yin D, Li X, Dai Z and He J: Prognostic value of systemic inflammation score in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after hepatectomy. Oncotarget. 8:79366–79375. 2017.PubMed/NCBI

25 

Hu D, Lin Y, Liu F, Zeng L, Ouyang X, Wang K, Zheng X and Huang Q: Elevated preoperative platelet to lymphocyte ratio indicates poor survival in patients with resected high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma. Clin Lab. 62:1443–1449. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

26 

Shi L, Qin X, Wang H, Xia Y, Li Y, Chen X, Shang L, Tai YT, Feng X, Acharya P, et al: Elevated neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio and decreased platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio are associated with poor prognosis in multiple myeloma. Oncotarget. 8:18792–18801. 2017.PubMed/NCBI

27 

McMillan DC: Systemic inflammation, nutritional status and survival in patients with cancer. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 12:223–226. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

28 

Chen TH, Zhang YC, Tan YT, An X, Xue C, Deng YF, Yang W, Yuan X and Shi YX: Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes predict prognosis of breast cancer patients treated with anti-Her-2 therapy. Oncotarget. 8:5219–5232. 2017.PubMed/NCBI

29 

Ji H, Houghton AM, Mariani TJ, Perera S, Kim CB, Padera R, Tonon G, McNamara K, Marconcini LA, Hezel A, et al: K-ras activation generates an inflammatory response in lung tumors. Oncogene. 25:2105–2112. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

30 

Shalapour S and Karin M: Immunity, inflammation, and cancer: An eternal fight between good and evil. J Clin Invest. 125:3347–3355. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

31 

Maeda K, Shibutani M, Otani H, Nagahara H, Ikeya T, Iseki Y, Tanaka H, Muguruma K and Hirakawa K: Inflammation-based factors and prognosis in patients with colorectal cancer. World J Gastrointest Oncol. 7:111–117. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

32 

Beltran BE, Aguilar C, Quiñones P, Morales D, Chavez JC, Sotomayor EM and Castillo JJ: The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio is an independent prognostic factor in patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma, unspecified. Leuk Lymphoma. 57:58–62. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

33 

Wu Y, Li C, Zhao J, Yang L, Liu F, Zheng H, Wang Z and Xu Y: Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratios predict chemotherapy outcomes and prognosis in patients with colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastasis. World J Surg Oncol. 14:2892016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

34 

Hayashi H, Takamura H, Ohbatake Y, Nakanuma S, Tajima H, Fushida S, Onishi I, Tani T, Shimizu K and Ohta T: Postoperative changes in neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and platelet count: A simple prognostic predictor for adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation. Asian J Surg. 41:341–348. 2018. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

35 

Liu X, He L, Han J, Wang L, Li M, Jiang Y, Wang X and Yang Z: Association of neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio and T lymphocytes with the pathogenesis and progression of HBV-associated primary liver cancer. PLoS One. 12:e01706052017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

36 

Li SH, Wang QX, Yang ZY, Jiang W, Li C, Sun P, Wei W, Shi M and Guo RP: Prognostic value of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio for hepatocellular carcinoma patients with portal/hepatic vein tumor thrombosis. World J Gastroenterol. 23:3122–3132. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

37 

Zhang J, Zhang HY, Li J, Shao XY and Zhang CX: The elevated NLR PLR and PLT may predict the prognosis of patients with colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncotarget. 8:68837–68846. 2017.PubMed/NCBI

38 

Song X, Zhu H, Pei Q, Tan F, Li C, Zhou Z, Zhou Y, Yu N, Li Y and Pei H: Significance of inflammation-based indices in the prognosis of patients with non-metastatic colorectal cancer. Oncotarget. 8:45178–45189. 2017.PubMed/NCBI

39 

Taussig MD, Irene Koran ME, Mouli SK, Ahmad A, Geevarghese S, Baker JC, Lipnik AJ, Banovac F and Brown DB: Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio predicts disease progression following intra-arterial therapy of hepatocellular carcinoma. HPB (Oxford). 19:458–464. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

40 

Wu SJ, Lin YX, Ye H, Li FY, Xiong XZ and Cheng NS: Lymphocyte to monocyte ratio and prognostic nutritional index predict survival outcomes of hepatitis B virus-associated hepatocellular carcinoma patients after curative hepatectomy. J Surg Oncol. 114:202–210. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

41 

Song W, Tian C, Wang K, Zhang RJ and Zou SB: The pretreatment lymphocyte to monocyte ratio predicts clinical outcome for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: A meta-analysis. Sci Rep. 7:466012017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

42 

Zhang C, Wang H, Ning Z, Xu L, Zhuang L, Wang P and Meng Z: Prognostic nutritional index serves as a predictive marker of survival and associates with systemic inflammatory response in metastatic intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Onco Targets Ther. 9:6417–6423. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

43 

Jiang BG, Ge RL, Sun LL, Zong M, Wei GT and Zhang YJ: Clinical parameters predicting survival duration after hepatectomy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Can J Gastroenterol. 25:603–608. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

44 

Zhang C, Wang H, Ning Z, Xu L, Zhuang L, Wang P and Meng Z: Serum liver enzymes serve as prognostic factors in patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Onco Targets Ther. 10:1441–1449. 2017. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

45 

Wang Y, Li J, Xia Y, Gong R, Wang K, Yan Z, Wan X, Liu G, Wu D, Shi L, et al: Prognostic nomogram for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma after partial hepatectomy. J Clin Oncol. 31:1188–1195. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

46 

Hyder O, Marques H, Pulitano C, Marsh JW, Alexandrescu S, Bauer TW, Gamblin TC, Sotiropoulos GC, Paul A, Barroso E, et al: A nomogram to predict long-term survival after resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: An Eastern and Western experience. JAMA Surg. 149:432–438. 2014. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

47 

Doussot A, Groot-Koerkamp B, Wiggers JK, Chou J, Gonen M, DeMatteo RP, Allen PJ, Kingham TP, D'Angelica MI and Jarnagin WR: Outcomes after resection of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: External validation and comparison of prognostic models. J Am Coll Surg. 221:452–461. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI

Related Articles

Journal Cover

January-2019
Volume 17 Issue 1

Print ISSN: 1792-1074
Online ISSN:1792-1082

Sign up for eToc alerts

Recommend to Library

Copy and paste a formatted citation
x
Spandidos Publications style
Wu Y, Ren F, Chai Y, Xue Z, Shen C, Zhang X, Lv Y and Hu L: Prognostic value of inflammation‑based indexes for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma following curative resection. Oncol Lett 17: 165-174, 2019.
APA
Wu, Y., Ren, F., Chai, Y., Xue, Z., Shen, C., Zhang, X. ... Hu, L. (2019). Prognostic value of inflammation‑based indexes for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma following curative resection. Oncology Letters, 17, 165-174. https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2018.9618
MLA
Wu, Y., Ren, F., Chai, Y., Xue, Z., Shen, C., Zhang, X., Lv, Y., Hu, L."Prognostic value of inflammation‑based indexes for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma following curative resection". Oncology Letters 17.1 (2019): 165-174.
Chicago
Wu, Y., Ren, F., Chai, Y., Xue, Z., Shen, C., Zhang, X., Lv, Y., Hu, L."Prognostic value of inflammation‑based indexes for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma following curative resection". Oncology Letters 17, no. 1 (2019): 165-174. https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2018.9618