研究动态
Articles below are published ahead of final publication in an issue. Please cite articles in the following format: authors, (year), title, journal, DOI.

NLR和PLR对于免疫相关不良反应的预测价值:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

Predictive value of NLR and PLR for immune-related adverse events: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

发表日期:2023 Sep 08
作者: Hong-Rui Lu, Peng-Fei Zhu, Ya-Ya Deng, Zhe-Ling Chen, Liu Yang
来源: Immunity & Ageing

摘要:

目前,缺乏经济实惠且易获取的指标,能准确预测由免疫检查点抑制剂(ICIs)使用导致的免疫相关不良事件(irAEs)。为了填补这一知识空白,我们的研究探讨了中性粒细胞-淋巴细胞比值(NLR)和血小板-淋巴细胞比值(PLR)这两个比率对肿瘤患者irAEs的潜在预测价值。我们在PubMed、Embase和Cochrane图书馆进行了系统检索。包括使用NLR或PLR与irAEs相关的研究。对所选研究进行了质量和偏倚风险评估。基于Cox模型分析创建了森林图。进行了随机效应的荟萃分析以估计比值比(OR)及其95%的置信区间(CI)。筛选594项研究后,共纳入了7项合格研究,涉及1068名肿瘤患者。基于Cox回归分析显示,低中性粒细胞-淋巴细胞比值(L-NLR)(OR = 3.02,95% CI 1.51至6.05,P = 0.002)和低血小板-淋巴细胞比值(L-PLR)(OR = 1.83,95% CI 1.21至2.76,P = 0.004)与irAEs相关。在切点值的亚组分析中,当NLR切点值为3时,irAEs与NLR显著相关(OR = 2.63,95% CI 1.63至4.26,P < 0.001)。低L-NLR和L-PLR均与irAEs显著相关。因此,对于被确定为irAEs风险较高的患者,应进行更加细致的监测和密切观察。© 2023。作者,以独家许可授予西班牙肿瘤学协会(FESEO)。
Currently, there is a lack of affordable and accessible indicators that can accurately predict immune-related adverse events (irAEs) resulting from the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). In order to address this knowledge gap, our study explore the potential predictive value of two ratios, namely the neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), for irAEs in cancer patients.A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library. Studies involving NLR or PLR with irAEs were included. Quality and risk of bias of the selected studies were assessed. Forest plots were created based on Cox model analysis. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted to estimate odds ratio (OR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI).After screening 594 studies, a total of 7 eligible studies with 1068 cancer patients were included. Analysis based on Cox regression showed that low neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (L-NLR) (OR = 3.02, 95% CI 1.51 to 6.05, P = 0.002) and low platelet-lymphocyte ratio (L-PLR) (OR = 1.83, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.76, P = 0.004) were associated with irAEs. In the subgroup analysis of cut-off value, when the NLR cut-off value was 3, irAEs was significantly correlated with NLR (OR = 2.63, 95% CI 1.63 to 4.26, P < 0.001).Both L-NLR and L-PLR have been found to be significantly associated with irAEs. Consequently, patients identified as being at a higher risk for irAEs should be subjected to more diligent monitoring and close observation.© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Federación de Sociedades Españolas de Oncología (FESEO).