Cargando…

Concurrent Comparison of the Prognostic Values of Tumor Budding, Tumor Stroma Ratio, Tumor Infiltrating Pattern and Lymphocyte-to-Monocyte Ratio in Colorectal Cancer Patients

Objectives: Tumor budding (TB), tumor stroma ratio (TSR), tumor infiltrating pattern (TIP), and preoperative lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) were previously reported to be useful prognostic factors in colorectal cancer (CRC); however, the correlation among these markers and their individual progn...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Yingcheng, Liu, You, Qiu, Xiaomei, Yan, Bing
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8521422/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34658263
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15330338211045826
_version_ 1784584897251246080
author Zhang, Yingcheng
Liu, You
Qiu, Xiaomei
Yan, Bing
author_facet Zhang, Yingcheng
Liu, You
Qiu, Xiaomei
Yan, Bing
author_sort Zhang, Yingcheng
collection PubMed
description Objectives: Tumor budding (TB), tumor stroma ratio (TSR), tumor infiltrating pattern (TIP), and preoperative lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) were previously reported to be useful prognostic factors in colorectal cancer (CRC); however, the correlation among these markers and their individual prognostic potency have not been extensively studied. Methods: A cohort of 147 stage I-IV CRC patients was obtained retrospectively, and the patients were divided into subgroups based on low or high TB/TSR/LMR, TIPa (expansile + intermediate) and TIPb (infiltrative) values. The differences in relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) intervals among these subgroups were determined by Kaplan–Meier analysis followed by log-rank tests. The Cox proportional hazard model was applied for the univariate and multivariate analysis of RFS and OS rates. Results:TB, TIP, and LMR, but not TSR, are useful markers for predicting patient survival. Patients with a poor histological grade and large tumor diameter were more likely to present with high TB, TIPb, and low LMR values; in addition, those with advanced T, N, and TNM stages and elevated preoperative CA199 levels had high TB and TIPb levels. TB, TIP, and LMR were significant prognostic factors for the RFS (TB: HR [hazard ratio] = 2.28, 95% CI = 1.30-4.00, P < .01; TIP: HR = 2.60, 95% CI = 1.46-4.60, P < .01; LMR: HR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.65-0.96, P = .02) and OS (TB: HR = 2.43, 95% CI = 1.32-4.48, P < .01; TIP: HR = 2.49, 95% CI = 1.34-4.63, P < .01; LMR: HR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.64-0.98, P = .03) intervals. In addition, TB and LMR were independent prognostic factors for the RFS interval (TB: HR = 1.80, 95% CI = 1.01-3.19, P = .05; LMR: HR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.67-0.96, P = .01), but only LMR was an independent factor for OS rates (HR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.65-0.98, P = .03). Conclusion: Although TB, TIP, and LMR are useful prognostic markers for CRC, the LMR is likely to be the only independent prognostic factor for both RFS and OS outcomes in practice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8521422
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85214222021-10-19 Concurrent Comparison of the Prognostic Values of Tumor Budding, Tumor Stroma Ratio, Tumor Infiltrating Pattern and Lymphocyte-to-Monocyte Ratio in Colorectal Cancer Patients Zhang, Yingcheng Liu, You Qiu, Xiaomei Yan, Bing Technol Cancer Res Treat Original Article Objectives: Tumor budding (TB), tumor stroma ratio (TSR), tumor infiltrating pattern (TIP), and preoperative lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) were previously reported to be useful prognostic factors in colorectal cancer (CRC); however, the correlation among these markers and their individual prognostic potency have not been extensively studied. Methods: A cohort of 147 stage I-IV CRC patients was obtained retrospectively, and the patients were divided into subgroups based on low or high TB/TSR/LMR, TIPa (expansile + intermediate) and TIPb (infiltrative) values. The differences in relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) intervals among these subgroups were determined by Kaplan–Meier analysis followed by log-rank tests. The Cox proportional hazard model was applied for the univariate and multivariate analysis of RFS and OS rates. Results:TB, TIP, and LMR, but not TSR, are useful markers for predicting patient survival. Patients with a poor histological grade and large tumor diameter were more likely to present with high TB, TIPb, and low LMR values; in addition, those with advanced T, N, and TNM stages and elevated preoperative CA199 levels had high TB and TIPb levels. TB, TIP, and LMR were significant prognostic factors for the RFS (TB: HR [hazard ratio] = 2.28, 95% CI = 1.30-4.00, P < .01; TIP: HR = 2.60, 95% CI = 1.46-4.60, P < .01; LMR: HR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.65-0.96, P = .02) and OS (TB: HR = 2.43, 95% CI = 1.32-4.48, P < .01; TIP: HR = 2.49, 95% CI = 1.34-4.63, P < .01; LMR: HR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.64-0.98, P = .03) intervals. In addition, TB and LMR were independent prognostic factors for the RFS interval (TB: HR = 1.80, 95% CI = 1.01-3.19, P = .05; LMR: HR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.67-0.96, P = .01), but only LMR was an independent factor for OS rates (HR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.65-0.98, P = .03). Conclusion: Although TB, TIP, and LMR are useful prognostic markers for CRC, the LMR is likely to be the only independent prognostic factor for both RFS and OS outcomes in practice. SAGE Publications 2021-10-16 /pmc/articles/PMC8521422/ /pubmed/34658263 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15330338211045826 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Article
Zhang, Yingcheng
Liu, You
Qiu, Xiaomei
Yan, Bing
Concurrent Comparison of the Prognostic Values of Tumor Budding, Tumor Stroma Ratio, Tumor Infiltrating Pattern and Lymphocyte-to-Monocyte Ratio in Colorectal Cancer Patients
title Concurrent Comparison of the Prognostic Values of Tumor Budding, Tumor Stroma Ratio, Tumor Infiltrating Pattern and Lymphocyte-to-Monocyte Ratio in Colorectal Cancer Patients
title_full Concurrent Comparison of the Prognostic Values of Tumor Budding, Tumor Stroma Ratio, Tumor Infiltrating Pattern and Lymphocyte-to-Monocyte Ratio in Colorectal Cancer Patients
title_fullStr Concurrent Comparison of the Prognostic Values of Tumor Budding, Tumor Stroma Ratio, Tumor Infiltrating Pattern and Lymphocyte-to-Monocyte Ratio in Colorectal Cancer Patients
title_full_unstemmed Concurrent Comparison of the Prognostic Values of Tumor Budding, Tumor Stroma Ratio, Tumor Infiltrating Pattern and Lymphocyte-to-Monocyte Ratio in Colorectal Cancer Patients
title_short Concurrent Comparison of the Prognostic Values of Tumor Budding, Tumor Stroma Ratio, Tumor Infiltrating Pattern and Lymphocyte-to-Monocyte Ratio in Colorectal Cancer Patients
title_sort concurrent comparison of the prognostic values of tumor budding, tumor stroma ratio, tumor infiltrating pattern and lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio in colorectal cancer patients
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8521422/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34658263
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15330338211045826
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangyingcheng concurrentcomparisonoftheprognosticvaluesoftumorbuddingtumorstromaratiotumorinfiltratingpatternandlymphocytetomonocyteratioincolorectalcancerpatients
AT liuyou concurrentcomparisonoftheprognosticvaluesoftumorbuddingtumorstromaratiotumorinfiltratingpatternandlymphocytetomonocyteratioincolorectalcancerpatients
AT qiuxiaomei concurrentcomparisonoftheprognosticvaluesoftumorbuddingtumorstromaratiotumorinfiltratingpatternandlymphocytetomonocyteratioincolorectalcancerpatients
AT yanbing concurrentcomparisonoftheprognosticvaluesoftumorbuddingtumorstromaratiotumorinfiltratingpatternandlymphocytetomonocyteratioincolorectalcancerpatients