Search

Background: In recent studies, accumulating evidence has revealed a strong association between the inflammatory response and the prognosis of many tumors. There is a certain correlation of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) with the prognosis in gastric cancer (GC) patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). However, the existing research results have remained controversial., Aim: To explore the relationship between NLR ratio and prognosis of GC patients receiving NAC., Methods: A thorough systematic search was performed in databases such as PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library, the search is available until February 29, 2024, and studies exploring the interaction of NLR with clinical outcomes were collected. Relevant studies meeting pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria were carefully chosen. The outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS), relapse-free survival, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). The hazard ratio (HR) and its corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) were utilized for estimation., Results: Our analysis encompassed 852 patients and incorporated data from 12 cohort studies. The comprehensive analysis revealed a significant association of high NLR with reduced OS (HR = 1.76; 95%CI: 1.22-2.54, P = 0.003), relapse-free survival (HR = 3.73; 95%CI: 1.74-7.96, P = 0.0007), and PFS (HR = 2.32; 95%CI: 1.42-3.81, P = 0.0008) in patients. However, this correlation in disease-free survival was not significant. NLR demonstrated its crucial role in effectively predicting the OS of GC patients undergoing NAC at different detection times, ages, regions, and NLR thresholds., Conclusion: In GC patients receiving NAC, an elevated NLR is strongly associated with reduced OS and PFS. NLR has become an effective biomarker for patient prognosis evaluation, providing valuable insights for the treatment strategies of NAC in GC patients., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: All the authors report no relevant conflicts of interest for this article., (©The Author(s) 2024. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To develop a simple risk score model of in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE) including all-cause mortality, new or recurrent myocardial infarction (MI), and evaluate the efficacy about revascularization on patients with different risk., Methods: The basic characteristics, diagnosis, therapy, and in-hospital outcomes of 1512 ACS patients from Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) study of China were collected to develop a risk score model by multivariable stepwise logistic regression. The goodness-of-fit test and discriminative power of the final model were assessed respectively. The best cut-off value for the risk score was used to assess the impact of revascularization for ST-elevation MI (STEMI) and non-ST elevation acute coronary artery syndrome (NSTEACS) on in-hospital outcomes., Results: (1) The following 6 independent risk factors accounted for about 92.5% of the prognostic information: age > or =80 years (4 points), SBP < or =90 mm Hg (6 points), DBP > or =90 mm Hg (2 points), Killip II (3 points), Killip III or IV (9 points), cardiac arrest during presentation (4 points), ST-segment elevation (3 points) or depression (5 points) or combination of elevation and depression (4 points) on electrocardiogram at presentation. (2) CHIEF risk model was excellent with Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test of 0.673 and c statistics of 0.776. (3)1301 ACS patients previously enrolled in GRACE study were divided into 2 groups with the best cut-off value of 5.5 points. The impact of revascularization on the in-hospital MACE of the higher risk subsets was stronger than that of the lower risk subsets both in STEMI [OR (95% CI) = 0.32 (0.11, 0.94), chi2 = 5.39, P = 0.02] and NSTEACS [OR (95% CI) = 0.32 (0.06, 0.94), chi2 =4.17, P = 0.04] population. However, both STEMI (61.7% vs. 78.3%, P = 0.000) and NSTEACS (42.0% vs 62.3%, P = 0.000) patients with the risk scores more than 5.5 points had lower revascularization rates., Conclusion: The risk score provides excellent ability to predict in-hospital death or (re) MI quantitatively and accurately. The patients undergoing revascularization with risk score greater than 5.5 have lower incidence rates of endpoint.