The Prognostic Value of Treatment-Related Lymphopenia in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Patients

Li-Ting Liu; Qiu-Yan Chen; Lin-Quan Tang; Shan-Shan Guo; Ling Guo; Hao-Yuan Mo; Ming-Yuan Chen; Chong Zhao; Xiang Guo; Chao-Nan Qian; Mu-Sheng Zeng; Jin-Xin Bei; Jing Tan; Shuai Chen; Ming-Huang Hong; Jian-Yong Shao; Ying Sun; Jun Ma; Hai-Qiang Mai

doi:10.4143/crt.2016.595

Articles

Page Path: HOME > Cancer Res Treat > Volume 50(1); 2018 > Article

Original Article The Prognostic Value of Treatment-Related Lymphopenia in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Patients: Li-Ting Liu, MD, PhD^1,2, Qiu-Yan Chen, MD, PhD^1,2, Lin-Quan Tang, MD, PhD^1,2, Shan-Shan Guo, MD, PhD^1,2, Ling Guo, MD, PhD^1,2, Hao-Yuan Mo, MD, PhD^1,2, Ming-Yuan Chen, MD, PhD^1,2, Chong Zhao, MD, PhD^1,2, Xiang Guo, MD, PhD^1,2, Chao-Nan Qian, MD, PhD^1,2, Mu-Sheng Zeng, MD, PhD¹, Jin-Xin Bei, PhD¹, Jing Tan, PhD¹, Shuai Chen, PhD¹, Ming-Huang Hong, MD, PhD^1,3, Jian-Yong Shao, MD, PhD^1,4, Ying Sun, MD, PhD^1,5, Jun Ma, MD, PhD^1,5, Hai-Qiang Mai, MD, PhD^1,2,; Cancer Research and Treatment : Official Journal of Korean Cancer Association 2018;50(1):19-29.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2016.595
Published online: April 5, 2017

¹State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China

²Department of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China

³Good Clinical Practice Center, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China

⁴Department of Molecular Diagnostics, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China

⁵Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, China

Correspondence: Hai-Qiang Mai, MD, PhD Department of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, 651 Dongfeng Road East, Guangzhou 510060, China
Tel: 86-20-87343643 Fax: 86-20-87343392 E-mail: maihq@sysucc.org.cn

*Li-Ting Liu and Qiu-Yan Chen contributed equally to this work.

• Received: December 18, 2016 • Accepted: February 11, 2017

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

11,662 Views
355 Download
61 Web of Science
55 Crossref
60 Scopus

prev next

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results
Discussion
Electronic Supplementary Material
NOTES
REFERENCES

Abstract

Purpose
This study was conducted to evaluate the prognostic value of treatment-related lymphopenia in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC).
Materials and Methods
A total of 413 consecutive stage II-IVb NPC patients treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) were enrolled. The overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method, and differences were compared using the log-rank test.
Results
A minimum (mini)–absolute lymphocyte counts (ALC) of < 390 cells/μL or ALC after 3 months of CCRT (post3m-ALC) < 705 cells/μL was significantly associated with worse outcome than mini-ALC ≥ 390 cells/μL (OS, p=0.002; PFS, p=0.005; DMFS, p=0.004) or post3m-ALC ≥ 705 cells/μL (OS, p < 0.001; PFS, p < 0.001; DMFS, p=0.001). Patients with lymphopenia (mini-ALC < 390 cells/μL and post3m-ALC < 705 cells/μL) had a worse prognosis than those without lymphopenia (mini-ALC ≥ 390 cells/μL and post3m-ALC ≥ 705 cells/μL) (OS, p < 0.001; PFS, p < 0.001; DMFS, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that post3m-ALC was an independent prognostic factor for OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12 to 2.78; p=0.015), PFS (HR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.23 to 2.82; p=0.003), and DMFS (HR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.13 to 3.08; p=0.014). Multivariate analysis also revealed that patients with lymphopenia had a high risk of death (HR, 3.79; 95% CI, 1.75 to 8.19; p=0.001), disease progression (HR, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.59 to 5.41; p=0.001), and distant metastasis (HR, 3.89; 95% CI, 1.67 to 9.10; p=0.002). Multivariate analysis performed with time dependent Cox regression demonstrated ALC was an independent prognostic factor for OS (HR, 0.995; 95% CI, 0.991 to 0.999; p=0.025) and PFS (HR, 0.993; 95% CI, 0.988 to 0.998; p=0.006).
Conclusion
Treatment-related lymphopenia was a poor prognostic factor in NPC patients.
Key words: Nasopharyngeal carcinoma, Lymphopenia, Survival, Radiotherapy

Introduction

Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC), which is the most common malignancy arising from the nasopharynx epithelium, is especially prevalent in southern China. Radiation therapy (RT) is the primary treatment for NPC [1,2]. Specifically, the use of concurrent chemotherapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) has been shown to provide a survival benefit [3-5], but 20%-30% of patients still die from tumor relapse [6]. Currently, the TNM stage is the mainstay measurement method used to predict the prognosis of NPC patients. Nevertheless, outcomes vary among patients within the same staging category and histological classifications because of the heterogeneity of the tumor [7,8]. Accordingly, methods for investigating efficient prognostic factors and stratifying patients with a high risk of tumor relapse need to be developed.

The immune system is believed to be important in the prevention of cancer development and progression. Specifically, lymphocytes, which are an essential component of host immunity, play a critical role in the destruction of residual tumor cells and related micrometastases [9,10]. RT is known to induce immunosuppression, regardless of the administration of chemotherapy, and to directly suppress immune function by destroying mature circulating lymphocytes [11-14]. In our daily clinical work, we have observed decreases in the lymphocyte population over the course of RT, and this population subsequently recovers in NPC patients. Moreover, previous studies of other cancer types demonstrated that lymphopenia was associated with poor patient prognosis [15-19]. Therefore, we analyzed the ability of the decline in absolute lymphocyte counts (ALC) during concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) and the latter phase after the completion of CCRT to predict clinical outcome. We hypothesize that treatment-related lymphopenia is correlated with poor patient prognosis and may provide an additional dimension for risk stratification and individualized therapy.

Materials and Methods

1. Patients

A total of 427 previously untreated NPC patients were enrolled between February 2007 and December 2012. The eligibility criteria were as follows: (1) biopsy-proven World Health Organization 2- or 3-histopathologic type NPC; (2) stage II-IVb disease according to the seventh edition of the International Union against Cancer/American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system; (3) no evidence of distant metastases; (4) Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status grade 0 or 1; (5) aged 18 years or older; (6) absence of secondary malignancy, pregnancy or lactation; and (7) adequate hematological function (white blood cell counts ≥ 4,000/μL and platelet counts ≥ 100,000/μL), adequate renal function (creatinine clearance ≥ 50 mL/min), and adequate hepatic function (serum bilirubin level < 1.5 mg/dL). Fourteen patients (eight patients who were lost during follow-up, one with heart deficiency, three with liver deficiency, and two pregnant patients) were excluded from the study, giving a final cohort of 413 patients.

2. Pretreatment evaluation

Pretreatment assessment consisted of a medical history, complete physical examination, fiber-optic nasopharyngoscopy, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the nasopharynx and neck, electrocardiography, chest radiography, abdominal sonography, bone scan or whole-body fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography, as well as complete blood count, renal and liver function tests. Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) serology was assessed using a previously described immunoenzymatic assay [20], and the plasma level of EBV DNA was measured by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction [21,22]. All patients provided written informed consent for enrolling in our prospective database and the study was approved by the Clinical Research Committee of the study institute.

3. Treatment

All patients received 2-3 cycles of concurrent cisplatin (80-100 mg/m²) as an intravenous infusion every 21 days. IMRT was administered to all identified patients in the study. The IMRT plan was designed based on previous studies [6,23] (Supplementary Methods). All patients were treated according to the treatment principles for NPC patients at our institute.

4. Lymphocyte counts examination

The complete blood count (CBC) was determined using a Sysmex XE-5000 automated hematology analyzer (Sysmex, Kobe, Japan). The ALC were assessed prior to CCRT and weekly thereafter until completion of the CCRT. The ALC was also collected three months after CCRT. Additional CBC tests were performed for patients who developed a specific condition during treatment. The ALC before CCRT (pre-ALC), minimum ALC during CCRT (mini-ALC), ALC after the completion of CCRT (post-ALC), and ALC 3 months after CCRT (post3m-ALC) were evaluated.

5. Outcome and follow-up

Our primary study endpoint was the overall survival (OS), which was calculated from the first day of treatment until the day of death from any cause or patient censoring at the recent follow-up. The secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), which was calculated from the first day of treatment until the day of first tumor relapse, death from any course or patient censoring at the recent follow-up, and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), defined as the duration from the first day of treatment to the date of distant relapse or patient censoring on the most recent follow-up. After completion of treatment, the patients were examined every 3 months during the first 3 years and every 6 months thereafter until death. The patient history was obtained, and a physical examination and nasopharyngoscopy were performed at each follow-up visit. MRI of the nasopharynx and neck, chest X-ray imaging, abdominal sonography, and plasma EBV DNA measurements were routinely performed on an annual basis or upon a clinical indication of tumor relapse.

6. Statistical analysis

Categorical variables were assessed using Fisher exact test and the chi-square test, whereas continuous variables were analyzed with the t test. The cut-off values for the pre-ALC, mini-ALC, post-ALC, and post3m-ALC demonstrated maximum sensitivity and specificity for survival based on receiver operating characteristic curves of OS. Survival was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. The hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the Cox proportional hazards model, and univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Time dependent Cox regression modeling was also conducted. The data were managed and analyzed using the SPSS ver. 20.0 statistical software package (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Two-tailed p-values of < 0.05 were considered to indicate significant differences.

Results

The characteristics of the 413 patients are presented in Table 1. Within the median follow-up duration of 60 months (range, 6 to 112 months), 99 patients died, including 62 who died due to distant metastases, 23 who died due to local and/or regional relapse, six who died due to severe adverse events, three who died due to non-cancer causes, two who died due to secondary malignant tumors after treatment and three who died due to unknown causes. Furthermore, 82 patients developed distant metastases, and 34 exhibited local or regional relapse. The 5-year survival rates for all patients were as follows: OS, 81.6%; PFS, 75.1%; DMFS, 82.7%.

1. ALC over time

Among the 413 patients, the median pre-ALC was 1,800 cells/μL (range, 300 to 4,710 cells/μL), the median mini-ALC was 300 cells/μL (range, 80 to 1,400 cells/μL), the median post-ALC was 300 cells/μL (range, 80 to 3,000 cells/μL), and the median post3m-ALC was 970 cells/μL (range, 280 to 3,600 cells/μL) (Table 1). According to both the summary data from all patients and the patient subgroup data, the ALC exhibited a downward trend during RT until reaching the minimum value, then recovered (Fig. 1).

2. Relationship between the variation in ALC and outcome

The cut-off values for the pre-ALC, mini-ALC, post-ALC, and post3m-ALC based on receiver operating characteristic curves were 1,315 cells/μL, 390 cells/μL, 325 cells/μL, and 705 cells/μL, respectively.

The OS differed significantly between the mini-ALC, post-ALC, and post3m-ALC groups. However, the OS did not differ significantly in the pre-ALC group (Table 2).

According to the survival curves, the PFS also differed significantly between the mini-ALC and post3m-ALC groups. Conversely, survival did not differ significantly between the pre-ALC and post-ALC groups (Table 2).

In the pre-ALC group, the DMFS differed between patients in the pre-ALC group, but this difference was not significant, whereas the differences among the mini-ALC, post-ALC, and post3m-ALC groups were all significant (Table 2).

The 5-year OS, PFS, and DMFS values of patients with a mini-ALC < 390 cells/μL or a post3m-ALC < 705 cells/μL were all significantly worse than those of patients with a mini-ALC ≥ 390 cells/μL or a post3m-ALC ≥ 705 cells/μL. Therefore, we defined patients with a mini-ALC < 390 cells/μL and post3m-ALC < 705 cells/μL as the lymphopenia group (n=86). Moreover, patients with a mini-ALC ≥ 390 cells/μL and post3m-ALC ≥ 705 cells/μL were defined as the non-lymphopenia group (n=95) (Table 3). Survival rates of patients in the lymphopenia group were worse than those of patients in the non-lymphopenia group (OS, p < 0.001; PFS, p < 0.001; DMFS, p < 0.001) (Table 2, Fig. 2).

Univariate analysis of all 413 patients demonstrated that N stage (p=0.001), the pretreatment EBV DNA level, the mini-ALC, the post-ALC and the post3m-ALC were significantly associated with OS (S1 Table). Additionally, N stage, the pretreatment EBV DNA level, the mini-ALC, and the post3m-ALC were significantly associated with PFS (S1 Table), and N stage, the pretreatment EBV DNA level, the mini-ALC, the post-ALC and the post3m-ALC were significantly correlated with DMFS (S1 Table). When ALC was re-analyzed as a time dependent variable, univariate analysis also demonstrated ALC was significantly correlated with OS, PFS and DMFS (S1 Table).

Multivariate analyses of all 413 patients were performed to further adjust for age, sex, T stage, N stage, family history, smoking, pretreatment EBV DNA level, VCA-IgA, EA-IgA, chemotherapy cycles, treatment days, dose of nasopharynx, dose of neck, pre-ALC, mini-ALC, post-ALC, and post3m-ALC. These analyses revealed that N stage (HR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.79; p=0.042), the pretreatment EBV DNA level (HR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.20 to 2.83; p=0.005) and the post3m-ALC (HR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.12 to 2.78; p=0.015) were independent prognostic factors for OS (Table 4). Additionally, N stage (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.67; p=0.038), the pretreatment EBV DNA level (HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.23 to 2.62; p=0.002), and the post3m-ALC (HR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.23 to 2.82; p=0.003) were independent prognostic factors for PFS (Table 4), and the pretreatment EBV DNA level (HR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.26 to 3.27; p=0.003) and the post3m-ALC (HR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.13 to 3.08; p=0.014) were independent prognostic factors for DMFS (Table 4). When ALC was re-analyzed as a time dependent variable, multivariate analysis demonstrated it was an independent prognostic factor of OS (HR, 0.995; 95% CI, 0.991 to 0.999; p=0.025) and PFS (HR, 0.993; 95% CI, 0.988 to 0.998; p=0.006) (S2 Table).

For the 181 patients in the lymphopenia and non-lymphopenia groups, univariate analyses showed that patients in the lymphopenia group were at a higher risk of death (p < 0.001), disease progression (p < 0.001), and distant metastasis (p < 0.001) than those in the non-lymphopenia group (Table 4). We subjected data from the 181 patients to another multivariate analysis, which revealed that the ALC (lymphopenia vs. nonlymphopenia) was the only independent prognostic factor for OS (HR, 3.79; 95% CI, 1.75 to 8.19; p=0.001), PFS (HR, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.59 to 5.41; p=0.001), and DMFS (HR, 3.89; 95% CI, 1.67 to 9.10; p=0.002) (Table 4).

Discussion

The data presented in this study demonstrated that a decreased ALC during RT and after the completion of treatment is associated with poor prognosis among NPC patients. This decrease in the ALC was attributed to the immunosuppression induced by RT [11]. Previous studies demonstrated that RT directly destroys mature circulating lymphocytes, which exhibit significant DNA fragmentation, even at low radiation doses (< 1 Gy) [13,14]. The ability of radiation to decrease the circulating ALC has been well established in previous studies of other cancer types [12,24]. For example, Tang et al. [25] found that RT reduced lymphocyte counts independent of concurrent chemotherapy use. This decrease was most pronounced near the completion of RT, and lower lymphocyte minima during definitive RT were associated with worse patient outcomes [25]. Moreover, Grossman et al. [19] collected serial lymphocyte counts, prognostic factors, treatment data, and survival data from four independent solid tumor studies. Their study demonstrated that treatment-related lymphopenia increased the risk of death in each cancer cohort [19]. Furthermore, Cho et al. [26] investigated the mini-ALC during RT in NPC and showed that this parameter may predict a poor 5-year disease-specific survival. However, it should be noted that the sample size of their study was relatively small; therefore, we conducted this study of 413 patients to further validate the results and improve statistical outcomes. The ALCs before CCRT, during CCRT, after the completion of CCRT and 3 months after the completion of RT were all documented. According to our study, among several variables associated with treatmentrelated lymphopenia, the mini-ALC and post3m-ALC were strongly correlated with survival. Specifically, a mini-ALC < 390 cells/μL indicates an early 2-fold increase in the risk of early death. Furthermore, patients with a post3m-ALC < 705 cells/μL were at an even higher risk of death, disease progression and distant metastasis. When we combined these two ALC measurement time points, we found that lymphopenia (mini-ALC < 390 cells/μL and post3m-ALC < 705 cells/μL) was strongly correlated with a poor clinical outcome, specifically, a nearly 4-fold increase in the risk of early death and distant metastasis and a nearly 3-fold increase in the risk of disease progression. We assumed that the reduction of individual productivity of lymphocytes in response to RT and the extent of the tumor might both be relevant to lymphopenia. Based on this assumption, cancer progression might lead lymphocyte infiltration from peripheral blood into tumors and adjacent tissues, resulting in lymphopenia [26]. Thus, the reduction in the tumor volume due to RT may reduce the number of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) and consequently increase the number of circulating lymphocytes. The degree to which the ALC declines and recovers may reflect the response to treatment. In most hospitals, a CBC is routinely obtained during treatment for NPC, and ALC data are easily obtained in a timely manner for rapid clinical implementation. Therefore, variations in the ALC could help us identify subpopulations sensitive to treatment and allow risk stratification for individualized therapy. Patients with lymphopenia experienced most of the treatment failures and therefore required intense treatment in subsequent phases, such as the administration of an additional target agent [27] or the inclusion adjuvant chemotherapy [5,28]. Moreover, additional immunotherapy could be administered to patients with treatment-related lymphopenia. For example, immunotherapy with EBV-specific cytotoxic T cells has been shown to be effective in post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorders [29], and the adoptive transfer of latent membrane protein 2–specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes has shown clinical efficacy in heavily pretreated patients with NPC [30,31]. We are initiating a phase II study of adoptively transferred TIL immunotherapy following CCRT in patients who are at a high risk of treatment failure [32]. Adoptive immunotherapy is a potential avenue for patients with treatment-related lymphopenia.

It should be noted that our study was subject to several limitations. Specifically, our data were unable to stratify the correlation between lymphocyte counts during or after RT and survival by lymphocyte type. Additionally, all patients in our study received CCRT, and the effects of radiotherapy and chemotherapy on lymphopenia could not be separately investigated. Finally, our data were exclusively obtained from one center; therefore, these results must be validated by other datasets.

In conclusion, our study found that treatment-related lymphopenia was correlated with poor prognosis in NPC patients. Therefore, lymphocytes should be considered a prognostic marker that may reflect the immunological status of patients during and after CCRT and stratify patients who are at a high risk of treatment failure. Future clinical trials and laboratory investigations to elucidate the immunology underlying treatment-related lymphopenia and the prevention of lymphopenia or restoration of immune function in NPC are warranted.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Supplementary materials are available at Cancer Research and Treatment website (http://www.e-crt.org).

crt-2016-595-suppl1.pdf

crt-2016-595-suppl2.pdf

crt-2016-595-suppl3.pdf

NOTES

Conflict of interest relevant to this article was not reported.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81425018, No. 81072- 226, No. 81201629, and No. 8160100709), the 863 Project (No. 2012AA02A501), the National Key Basic Research Program of China (No. 2013CB910304), the Special Support Plan of Guangdong Province (No. 2014TX01R145), the SCI-Tech Project Foundation of Guangdong Province (No. 2014A020- 212103, No. 2011B080701034, No. 2011B031800161), the Health & Medical Collaborative Innovation Project of Guangzhou City (No. 201400000001), the National Science & Technology Pillar Program during the Twelfth Five-year Plan Period (No. 2014BAI09B10), the PhD Start-up Fund of the Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province, China (No. 2016A- 030310221), the Cultivation Foundation for Junior Teachers in Sun Yat Sen University (No. 16ykpy28), the Sun Yat-Sen University Clinical Research 5010 Program, the Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center Clinical Research 308 Program, and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities.

Fig. 1.

Variation in median ALC among all patients (A) and subgroups of patients stratified by the pre-ALC (< 1,315 cells/μL vs. ≥ 1,315 cells/μL) (B), mini-ALC (< 390 cells/μL vs. ≥ 390 cells/μL) (C), post-ALC (< 325 cells/μL vs. ≥ 325 cells/μL) (D), post3m-ALC (< 705 cells/μL vs. ≥ 705 cells/μL) (E), and mini-ALC combined with post3m-ALC (lymphopenia vs. nonlymphopenia) (F). ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts; pre-ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts before concurrent chemoradiotherapy; mini-ALC, minimum absolute lymphocyte counts during treatment; post-ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts after completion of treatment; post3m-ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts 3 months after completion of treatment.

Fig. 2.

Comparison of patients in the lymphopenia group (mini-ALC < 390 cells/μL and post3m-ALC < 705 cells/μL) with patients in the non-lymphopenia group (mini-ALC ≥ 390 cells/μL or post3m-ALC ≥ 705 cells/μL) in terms of overall survival (A), progression-free survival (B), and distant metastasis-free survival (C). mini-ALC, minimum absolute lymphocyte counts during treatment; post3m-ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts 3 months after completion of treatment.

Table 1.

Characteristics of 413 patients

Characteristic	Patient (n=413)
Age, median (range, yr)	45 (20-74)
Sex
Male	286 (69.2)
Female	127 (30.8)
T stage
T1	25 (6.1)
T2	61 (14.8)
T3	263 (63.7)
T4	64 (15.5)
N stage
N0	54 (13.1)
N1	183 (44.3)
N2	153 (37.0)
N3	23 (5.6)
Overall stage
II	39 (9.4)
III	290 (70.2)
IVa	63 (15.3)
IVb	21 (5.1)
Family history
Yes	43 (10.4)
No	370 (89.6)
Smoking
Yes	135 (32.7)
No	278 (67.3)
EBV DNA level (copy/mL)
< 4,000	258 (62.5)
≥ 4,000	155 (37.5)
VCA-IgA
< 1:80	100 (24.2)
≥ 1:80	313 (75.8)
EA-IgA
< 1:10	140 (33.9)
≥ 1:10	273 (66.1)
Chemotherapy cycles
2	180
3	233
Treatment days	44 (39-52)
Dose of nasopharynx	69 (68-70)
Dose of neck	64 (60-70)
Pre-ALC (cells/μL)	1,800 (300-4,710)
Mini-ALC (cells/μL)	300 (80-1,400)
Post-ALC (cells/μL)	300 (80-3,000)
Post3m-ALC (cells/μL)	970 (280-3,600)

Values are presented as median (range) or number (%).

EBV, Epstein-Barr virus; VCA, viral capsid antigen; EA, early antigen; pre-ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts before treatment; mini-ALC, minimum absolute lymphocyte counts during treatment; post-ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts after completion of treatment; post3m-ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts 3 months after completion of treatment.

Table 2.

Survival rates of patients allocated in each ALC group

Factor	5-Yr OS (95% CI, %)	p-value	5-Yr PFS (95% CI, %)	p-value	5-Yr DMFS (95% CI, %)	p-value
Pre-ALC (cells/μL)
< 1,315	79.4 (70.0-88.8)	0.083	68.2 (58.2-78.2)	0.057	78.2 (69.0-87.4)	0.131
≥ 1,315	90.0 (78.6-87.6)		76.5 (71.8-81.2)		83.4 (79.1-87.7)
Mini-ALC (cells/μL)
< 390	79.0 (74.1-83.9)	0.002	72.4 (67.3-77.5)	0.005	80.1 (75.4-84.8)	0.004
≥ 390	90.0 (83.7-96.3)		79.8 (71.0-88.6)		90.9 (85.2-96.6)
Post-ALC (cells/μL)
< 325	79.9 (74.2-85.6)	0.038	73.4 (67.3-79.5)	0.135	79.1 (73.4-84.8)	0.041
≥ 325	83.8 (78.1-89.5)		76.3 (70.0-82.6)		86.0 (80.7-91.3)
Post-ALC (cells/μL)
< 705	69.9 (59.9-79.9)	< 0.001	62.7 (52.5-72.9)	< 0.001	71.4 (61.4-81.4)	0.001
≥ 705	85.3 (81.2-89.4)		78.2 (73.5-82.9)		85.4 (81.3-89.5)
Mini-ALC combined with post3m-ALC
Lymphopenia group	69.4 (59.0-79.8)	< 0.001	61.7 (51.1-72.3)	< 0.001	70.8 (60.4-81.2)	< 0.001
Non-lymphopenia group	90.5 (84.0-97.0)		79.8 (70.8-88.8)		91.4 (85.7-97.1)

ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts; OS, overall survival; CI, confidence interval; PFS, progression-free survival; DMFS, distant metastasis-free survival; pre-ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts before treatment; mini-ALC, minimum absolute lymphocyte counts during treatment; post-ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts after completion of treatment; post3m-ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts 3 months after completion of treatment; lymphopenia, mini-ALC < 390 cells/μL and post3m-ALC < 705 cells/μL; non-lymphopenia, ALC ≥ 390 cells/μL or post3m-ALC ≥ 705 cells/μL.

Table 3.

The characteristics of 181 patients (mini-ALC combined with post3m-ALC)

Characteristic	Lymphopenia (n=86)	Non-lymphopenia (n=95)	p-value
Age, median (range, yr)	44 (20-65)	46 (23-73)	0.106
Sex
Male	50 (58.1)	64 (67.4)	0.199
Female	36 (41.9)	31 (32.6)
T stage
T1	6 (7.0)	3 (3.2)	0.694
T2	15 (17.4)	16 (16.8)
T3	52 (60.5)	61 (64.2)
T4	13 (15.1)	15 (15.8)
N stage
N0	6 (7.0)	17 (17.9)	0.027
N1	38 (44.2)	48 (50.5)
N2	32 (37.2)	26 (27.4)
N3	10 (11.6)	4 (4.2)
Overall stage
II	11 (12.8)	9 (9.5)	0.452
III	54 (62.8)	67 (70.5)
IVa	13 (15.1)	15 (15.8)
IVb	8 (9.3)	4 (4.2)
Family history
Yes	13 (15.1)	5 (5.3)	0.027
No	73 (84.9)	90 (94.7)
Smoking
Yes	18 (20.9)	31 (32.6)	0.077
No	68 (79.1)	64 (67.4)
EBV DNA level (copy/mL)
< 4,000	45 (52.3)	69 (72.6)	0.005
≥ 4,000	41 (47.7)	26 (27.4)
VCA-IgA
< 1:80	23 (26.7)	23 (24.2)	0.698
≥ 1:80	63 (73.3)	72 (75.8)
EA-IgA
< 1:10	34 (39.5)	29 (30.5)	0.204
≥ 1:10	52 (60.5)	66 (69.5)

Values are presented as number (%) unless otherwise indicated. mini-ALC, minimum absolute lymphocyte counts during treatment; post3m-ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts 3 months after completion of treatment; lymphopenia, mini-ALC < 390 cells/μL and post3m-ALC < 705 cells/μL; non-lymphopenia, ALC ≥ 390 cells/μL or post3m-ALC ≥ 705 cells/μL; EBV, Epstein-Barr virus; VCA, viral capsid antigen; EA, early antigen.

Table 4.

Multivariate analyses of the independent significance prognostic factors of clinical outcome

Endpoint	Factor	HR (95% CI)	p-value
OS^a)	Post3m-ALC	1.76 (1.12-2.78)	0.015
	Pre-EBV DNA	1.84 (1.20-2.83)	0.005
	N stage	1.35 (1.01-1.79)	0.042
OS^b)	Mini-ALC combined with post3m-ALC	3.79 (1.75-8.19)	0.001
PFS^a)	Post3m-ALC	1.86 (1.23-2.82)	0.003
	Pre-EBV DNA	1.79 (1.23-2.62)	0.002
	N stage	1.30 (1.01-1.67)	0.038
PFS^b)	Mini-ALC combined with post3m-ALC	2.93 (1.59-5.41)	0.001
DMFS^a)	Post3m-ALC	1.87 (1.13-3.08)	0.014
	Pre-EBV DNA	2.03 (1.26-3.27)	0.003
DMFS^b)	Mini-ALC combined with post3m-ALC	3.89 (1.67-9.10)	0.002

HR, hazard ratio; CI, confidence interval; OS, overall survival; post3m-ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts 3 months after completion of treatment; EBV, Epstein-Barr virus; mini-ALC, minimum absolute lymphocyte counts during treatment; PFS, progression-free survival; DMFS, distant metastasis-free survival; VCA, viral capsid antigen; EA, early antigen; pre-ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts before treatment; post-ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts after completion of treatment.

^a) The analysis was performed with the following covariates (413 patients): age, sex, T stage, N stage, family history, smoking, pretreatment EBV DNA level, VCA-IgA, EA-IgA, chemotherapy cycles, dose of nasopharynx, dose of neck, treatment days, pre-ALC, mini-ALC, post-ALC, and post3m-ALC,

^b) The analysis was performed with the following covariates (181 patients): the mini-ALC combined with post3m-ALC (lymphopenia vs. non-lymphopenia), age, sex, T stage, N stage, family history, smoking status, the pretreatment EBV DNA level, the VCA-IgA level, the EA-IgA level, chemotherapy cycles, dose of nasopharynx, dose of neck, and treatment days.

REFERENCES

1. Cao SM, Simons MJ, Qian CN. The prevalence and prevention of nasopharyngeal carcinoma in China. Chin J Cancer. 2011;30:114–9. Article PubMed PMC
2. Choa G. Nasopharyngeal carcinoma: some observations on the clinical features and technique of examination. Pac Med Surg. 1967;75:172–4. Article PubMed
3. Al-Sarraf M, LeBlanc M, Giri PG, Fu KK, Cooper J, Vuong T, et al. Chemoradiotherapy versus radiotherapy in patients with advanced nasopharyngeal cancer: phase III randomized Intergroup study 0099. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:1310–7. Article PubMed
4. Chan AT, Teo PM, Ngan RK, Leung TW, Lau WH, Zee B, et al. Concurrent chemotherapy-radiotherapy compared with radiotherapy alone in locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: progression-free survival analysis of a phase III randomized trial. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:2038–44. Article PubMed
5. Lee AW, Tung SY, Ngan RK, Chappell R, Chua DT, Lu TX, et al. Factors contributing to the efficacy of concurrent-adjuvant chemotherapy for locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: combined analyses of NPC-9901 and NPC-9902 Trials. Eur J Cancer. 2011;47:656–66. Article PubMed
6. Sun X, Su S, Chen C, Han F, Zhao C, Xiao W, et al. Long-term outcomes of intensity-modulated radiotherapy for 868 patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma: an analysis of survival and treatment toxicities. Radiother Oncol. 2014;110:398–403. Article PubMed
7. Ludwig JA, Weinstein JN. Biomarkers in cancer staging, prognosis and treatment selection. Nat Rev Cancer. 2005;5:845–56. Article PubMed
8. Wei WI, Sham JS. Nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Lancet. 2005;365:2041–54. Article PubMed
9. Fogar P, Sperti C, Basso D, Sanzari MC, Greco E, Davoli C, et al. Decreased total lymphocyte counts in pancreatic cancer: an index of adverse outcome. Pancreas. 2006;32:22–8. Article PubMed
10. Sarraf KM, Belcher E, Raevsky E, Nicholson AG, Goldstraw P, Lim E. Neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio and its association with survival after complete resection in non-small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009;137:425–8. Article PubMed
11. Formenti SC, Demaria S. Combining radiotherapy and cancer immunotherapy: a paradigm shift. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105:256–65. Article PubMed PMC
12. Santin AD, Hermonat PL, Ravaggi A, Bellone S, Roman J, Pecorelli S, et al. Effects of concurrent cisplatinum administration during radiotherapy vs. radiotherapy alone on the immune function of patients with cancer of the uterine cervix. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;48:997–1006. Article PubMed
13. Stratton JA, Byfield PE, Byfield JE, Small RC, Benfield J, Pilch Y. A comparison of the acute effects of radiation therapy, including or excluding the thymus, on the lymphocyte subpopulations of cancer patients. J Clin Invest. 1975;56:88–97. Article PubMed PMC
14. Sellins KS, Cohen JJ. Gene induction by gamma-irradiation leads to DNA fragmentation in lymphocytes. J Immunol. 1987;139:3199–206. Article PubMed PDF
15. Lissoni P, Meregalli S, Bonetto E, Mancuso M, Brivio F, Colciago M, et al. Radiotherapy-induced lymphocytopenia: changes in total lymphocyte count and in lymphocyte subpopulations under pelvic irradiation in gynecologic neoplasms. J Biol Regul Homeost Agents. 2005;19:153–8. PubMed
16. Campian JL, Ye X, Brock M, Grossman SA. Treatment-related lymphopenia in patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. Cancer Invest. 2013;31:183–8. Article PubMed PMC
17. Cho O, Oh YT, Chun M, Noh OK, Lee HW. Radiation-related lymphopenia as a new prognostic factor in limited-stage small cell lung cancer. Tumour Biol. 2016;37:971–8. Article PubMed PDF
18. Mehrazin R, Uzzo RG, Kutikov A, Ruth K, Tomaszewski JJ, Dulaimi E, et al. Lymphopenia is an independent predictor of inferior outcome in papillary renal cell carcinoma. Urol Oncol. 2015;33:388.e19–25. Article PubMed PMC
19. Grossman SA, Ellsworth S, Campian J, Wild AT, Herman JM, Laheru D, et al. Survival in patients with severe lymphopenia following treatment with radiation and chemotherapy for newly diagnosed solid tumors. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2015;13:1225–31. Article PubMed PMC
20. Liu Y, Huang Q, Liu W, Liu Q, Jia W, Chang E, et al. Establishment of VCA and EBNA1 IgA-based combination by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay as preferred screening method for nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a two-stage design with a preliminary performance study and a mass screening in southern China. Int J Cancer. 2012;131:406–16. Article PubMed
21. An X, Wang FH, Ding PR, Deng L, Jiang WQ, Zhang L, et al. Plasma Epstein-Barr virus DNA level strongly predicts survival in metastatic/recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with palliative chemotherapy. Cancer. 2011;117:3750–7. Article PubMed
22. Shao JY, Li YH, Gao HY, Wu QL, Cui NJ, Zhang L, et al. Comparison of plasma Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) DNA levels and serum EBV immunoglobulin A/virus capsid antigen antibody titers in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Cancer. 2004;100:1162–70. Article PubMed
23. Lin S, Lu JJ, Han L, Chen Q, Pan J. Sequential chemotherapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy in the management of locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma: experience of 370 consecutive cases. BMC Cancer. 2010;10:39.Article PubMed PMC PDF
24. Yovino S, Grossman SA. Severity, etiology and possible consequences of treatment-related lymphopenia in patients with newly diagnosed high-grade gliomas. CNS Oncol. 2012;1:149–54. Article PubMed PMC
25. Tang C, Liao Z, Gomez D, Levy L, Zhuang Y, Gebremichael RA, et al. Lymphopenia association with gross tumor volume and lung V5 and its effects on non-small cell lung cancer patient outcomes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014;89:1084–91. Article PubMed
26. Cho O, Oh YT, Chun M, Noh OK, Hoe JS, Kim H. Minimum absolute lymphocyte count during radiotherapy as a new prognostic factor for nasopharyngeal cancer. Head Neck. 2016;38 Suppl 1:E1061–7. Article PubMed
27. Lee NY, Zhang Q, Pfister DG, Kim J, Garden AS, Mechalakos J, et al. Addition of bevacizumab to standard chemoradiation for locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (RTOG 0615): a phase 2 multi-institutional trial. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13:172–80. Article PubMed PMC
28. Twu CW, Wang WY, Chen CC, Liang KL, Jiang RS, Wu CT, et al. Metronomic adjuvant chemotherapy improves treatment outcome in nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients with postradiation persistently detectable plasma Epstein-Barr virus deoxyribonucleic acid. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014;89:21–9. Article PubMed
29. Merlo A, Turrini R, Dolcetti R, Zanovello P, Rosato A. Immunotherapy for EBV-associated malignancies. Int J Hematol. 2011;93:281–93. Article PubMed
30. Louis CU, Straathof K, Bollard CM, Ennamuri S, Gerken C, Lopez TT, et al. Adoptive transfer of EBV-specific T cells results in sustained clinical responses in patients with locoregional nasopharyngeal carcinoma. J Immunother. 2010;33:983–90. Article PubMed PMC
31. Chia WK, Teo M, Wang WW, Lee B, Ang SF, Tai WM, et al. Adoptive T-cell transfer and chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of metastatic and/or locally recurrent nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Mol Ther. 2014;22:132–9. Article PubMed PMC
32. Li J, Chen QY, He J, Li ZL, Tang XF, Chen SP, et al. Phase I trial of adoptively transferred tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte immunotherapy following concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Oncoimmunology. 2015;4:e976507Article PubMed PMC

Figure & Data

REFERENCES

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Nomograms containing body dose parameters for predicting survival in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma
Jianyun Jiang, Ruiping Zhai, Fangfang Kong, Chengrun Du, Hongmei Ying
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology.2024; 281(1): 181. CrossRef
Radiotherapy alone versus concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with stage II and T3N0 nasopharyngeal carcinoma with adverse features: A propensity score-matched cohort study
Wei-Wei Zhang, Jia-Yi Lin, Gao-Yuan Wang, Cheng-Long Huang, Ling-Long Tang, Yan-Ping Mao, Guan-Qun Zhou, Li-Zhi Liu, Li Tian, Ji-Bin Li, Jun Ma, Rui Guo
Radiotherapy and Oncology.2024; 194: 110189. CrossRef
Reduced-Volume Irradiation of Uninvolved Neck in Patients With Nasopharyngeal Cancer: Updated Results From an Open-Label, Noninferiority, Multicenter, Randomized Phase III Trial
Cheng-Long Huang, Ning Zhang, Wei Jiang, Fang-Yun Xie, Xiao-Qing Pei, Shao Hui Huang, Xue-Yan Wang, Yan-Ping Mao, Kun-Peng Li, Qing Liu, Ji-Bin Li, Shao-Qiang Liang, Guan-Jie Qin, Wei-Han Hu, Guan-Qun Zhou, Jun Ma, Ying Sun, Lei Chen, Ling-Long Tang
Journal of Clinical Oncology.2024; 42(17): 2021. CrossRef
Immunological effects of radiopharmaceutical therapy
Amanda G. Shea, Malick Bio Idrissou, Ana Isabel Torres, Tessa Chen, Reiner Hernandez, Zachary S. Morris, Quaovi H. Sodji
Frontiers in Nuclear Medicine.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Current Status and Future Directions of Proton Therapy for Head and Neck Carcinoma
Sara Lillo, Alfredo Mirandola, Alessandro Vai, Anna Maria Camarda, Sara Ronchi, Maria Bonora, Rossana Ingargiola, Barbara Vischioni, Ester Orlandi
Cancers.2024; 16(11): 2085. CrossRef
Treatment-Related Lymphopenia is Possibly a Marker of Good Prognosis in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: a Propensity-Score Matching Analysis
Ke-gui Weng, Hai-ke Lei, De-Song Shen, Ying Wang, Xiao-Dong Zhu
Cancer Management and Research.2024; Volume 16: 603. CrossRef
A prognostic nomogram for patients with III–IV nasopharyngeal carcinoma based on dynamic changes in the inflammatory and nutrition index
Guangyi Cheng, Shiwang Yuan, Jiang Wang, Sijia Deng, Yang Wu, Yuyan Wang, Yu Shen, Liantao Li
Clinical and Translational Oncology.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Impact of Radiation Dose to Circulating Immune Cells on Tumor Control and Survival in Esophageal Cancer
Shang Cai, Yawen Fan, Qi Guo, Yanze Sun, Peifeng Zhao, Ye Tian, Qiuhong Fan
Cancer Biotherapy and Radiopharmaceuticals.2023; 38(6): 380. CrossRef
Meta-analysis and Critical Review: Association Between Radio-induced Lymphopenia and Overall Survival in Solid Cancers
Yasmine El Houat, Christophe Massard, Veronique Quillien, Renaud de Crevoisier, Joël Castelli
Advances in Radiation Oncology.2023; 8(2): 101038. CrossRef
The prognostic predictive value of systemic immune index and systemic inflammatory response index in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Li Wang, Xianfei Qin, Yu Zhang, Shouyu Xue, Xicheng Song
Frontiers in Oncology.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Prognostic Significance of the Post-Treatment Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio in Pharyngeal Cancers Treated with Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy
Ji Min Yun, Man Ki Chung, Chung Hwan Baek, Young Ik Son, Myung Ju Ahn, Dongryul Oh, Ki Won Kim, Yoon Kyoung So
Cancers.2023; 15(4): 1248. CrossRef
Analysis of risk characteristics for metachronous metastasis in different period of nasopharyngeal carcinoma
Zhaodong Fei, Huiling Hong, Ting Xu, Yiying Xu, Jiawei Chen, Xiufang Qiu, Jianming Ding, Ye Feng, Chaoxiong Huang, Li Li, Mengying Li, Chuanben Chen
BMC Cancer.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Higher radiation dose on immune cells is associated with radiation-induced lymphopenia and worse prognosis in patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
Jianjian Qiu, Hancui Lin, Dongmei Ke, Yilin Yu, Jiaying Xu, Hejin Qiu, Qunhao Zheng, Hui Li, Hongying Zheng, Lingyun Liu, Zhiping Wang, Qiwei Yao, Jiancheng Li
Frontiers in Immunology.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Prognostic value of absolute lymphocyte count in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma
Rema Shah, Christina Liu, Hemali P. Shah, Benjamin L. Judson
Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology.2023; 8(4): 870. CrossRef
Dosimetric Effect of Thymus and Thoracic Duct on Radiation-Induced Lymphopenia in Patients With Primary Lung Cancer Who Received Thoracic Radiation
Jinliang Zhang, Li Yang, Hui Li, Jeff W. Chan, Eric K.W. Lee, Min Liu, Lingyu Ma, Qin Liu, Jian-Yue Jin, Pingfu Fu, Zhiyuan Xu, Feng-Ming (Spring) Kong
Advances in Radiation Oncology.2023; 8(6): 101260. CrossRef
Lymphopénie radio-induite : les lymphocytes comme nouvel organe à risque
P.A. Laurent, É. Deutsch
Cancer/Radiothérapie.2023; 27(6-7): 511. CrossRef
Impact of chemotherapeutic agents on liver microenvironment: oxaliplatin create a pro-metastatic landscape
Yuanyuan Ma, Chang Guo, Xijun Wang, Xundong Wei, Jie Ma
Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
CT-based dosiomics and radiomics model predicts radiation-induced lymphopenia in nasopharyngeal carcinoma patients
Qingfang Huang, Chao Yang, Jinmeng Pang, Biao Zeng, Pei Yang, Rongrong Zhou, Haijun Wu, Liangfang Shen, Rong Zhang, Fan Lou, Yi Jin, Albert Abdilim, Hekun Jin, Zijian Zhang, Xiaoxue Xie
Frontiers in Oncology.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Developing the POTOMAC Model: A Novel Prediction Model to Study the Impact of Lymphopenia Kinetics on Survival Outcomes in Head and Neck Cancer Via an Ensemble Tree-Based Machine Learning Approach
Carmen Kut, Doug Midthune, Emerson Lee, Peyton Fair, Tia Cheunkarndee, Todd McNutt, Theodore DeWeese, Carole Fakhry, Victor Kipnis, Harry Quon
JCO Clinical Cancer Informatics.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Preoperative prognostic nutritional index predicts prognosis of patients with oral cavity cancer
Ku‐Hao Fang, Sheng‐Wei Chang, Yi‐Chan Lee, Ethan I. Huang, Chia‐Hsuan Lai, Geng‐He Chang, Ming‐Shao Tsai, Cheng‐Ming Hsu, Yao‐Te Tsai
Oral Diseases.2022; 28(7): 1816. CrossRef
A comprehensive model based on temporal dynamics of peripheral T cell repertoire for predicting post-treatment distant metastasis of nasopharyngeal carcinoma
Yajing Zhang, Yujie Zhu, Jiaqi Wang, Yi Xu, Zekun Wang, Yang Liu, Xuebing Di, Lin Feng, Ye Zhang
Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy.2022; 71(3): 675. CrossRef
Identifying distinct risks of treatment failure in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Study based on the dynamic changes in peripheral blood lymphocytes, monocytes, N classification, and plasma Epstein‐Barr virus DNA
Li‐Ting Liu, Yu‐Jing Liang, Shan‐Shan Guo, Yao Xie, Guo‐Dong Jia, Dong‐Xiang Wen, Lin‐Quan Tang, Qiu‐Yan Chen, Hai‐Qiang Mai
Head & Neck.2022; 44(1): 34. CrossRef
Taxane/gemcitabine-containing chemotherapy plus locoregional IMRT for patients with de novo metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma: the treatment outcomes and prognostic factors analysis
Chengrun Du, Mengshan Ni, Jianyun Jiang, Fangfang Kong, Ruiping Zhai, Yingchen Lv, Chaosu Hu, Hongmei Ying
European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology.2022; 279(8): 3947. CrossRef
The impact of radiation induced lymphopenia in the prognosis of head and neck cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Dongjun Dai, Qiaoying Tian, Yongjie Shui, Jinfan Li, Qichun Wei
Radiotherapy and Oncology.2022; 168: 28. CrossRef
Systematic construction and external validation of an immune‐related prognostic model for nasopharyngeal carcinoma
Weiqun Lin, Di Cao, Annan Dong, Shaobo Liang, Yongyi Zhao, Cuibing Liu, Yinghua Yan, Xiaoliu Luo, Lizhi Liu, Xinchen Zeng, Qiaowen Ou
Head & Neck.2022; 44(5): 1086. CrossRef
Radiation Induced Lymphopenia Is Associated With the Effective Dose to the Circulating Immune Cells in Breast Cancer
Fang Chen, Jian-Yue Jin, Timothy S.K. Hui, Haiman Jing, Hong Zhang, Yaqing Nong, Ying Han, Weili Wang, Lingyu Ma, Fan Yi, Qingqing Chen, Yongsheng Zhang, Pingfu Fu, Li Yang, Zhiyuan Xu, Feng-Ming Spring Kong
Frontiers in Oncology.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
RuleFit-Based Nomogram Using Inflammatory Indicators for Predicting Survival in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, a Bi-Center Study
Chao Luo, Shuqi Li, Qin Zhao, Qiaowen Ou, Wenjie Huang, Guangying Ruan, Shaobo Liang, Lizhi Liu, Yu Zhang, Haojiang Li
Journal of Inflammation Research.2022; Volume 15: 4803. CrossRef
Head and neck cancers volume reduction: should we reduce our prophylactic node radiation to spare the antitumor immune response?
Y. El Houat, L. Bouvier, M. Baty, X. Palard-Novello, Y. Pointreau, R. de Crevoisier, J. Castelli
Cancer/Radiothérapie.2022; 26(6-7): 916. CrossRef
Establishment of a prognostic nomogram for patients with locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma incorporating clinical characteristics and dynamic changes in hematological and inflammatory markers
Qin Liu, Lingyu Ma, Huangrong Ma, Li Yang, Zhiyuan Xu
Frontiers in Oncology.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
The Current and Future Promises of Combination Radiation and Immunotherapy for Genitourinary Cancers
Ava Saidian, Isabella Dolendo, Andrew Sharabi, Tyler F. Stewart, Brent Rose, Rana R. McKay, Aditya Bagrodia, Amirali Salmasi
Cancers.2022; 15(1): 127. CrossRef
Hypofractionated concurrent chemoradiotherapy related lymphopenia and its association with survival in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients
FangJie Liu, YingJia Wu, JianHui Shao, Bo Qiu, SuPing Guo, QiaoTing Luo, JinYu Guo, DaQuan Wang, Chu Chu, Rui Zhou, NaiBin Chen, XinLei Ai, Hui Liu
Frontiers in Oncology.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Combined radiotherapy and immunotherapy in urothelial bladder cancer: harnessing the full potential of the anti-tumor immune response
Mame Daro-Faye, Wassim Kassouf, Luis Souhami, Gautier Marcq, Fabio Cury, Tamim Niazi, Paul Sargos
World Journal of Urology.2021; 39(5): 1331. CrossRef
Lymphopenia During Definitive Chemoradiotherapy in Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Association with Dosimetric Parameters and Patient Outcomes
Hui Xu, Maosheng Lin, Yingying Hu, Li Zhang, Qiaoqiao Li, Jinhan Zhu, Shi Wang, Mian Xi
The Oncologist.2021; 26(3): e425. CrossRef
Lymphopenia and intratumoral lymphocytic balance in the era of cancer immuno-radiotherapy
Michael I. Koukourakis, Alexandra Giatromanolaki
Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology.2021; 159: 103226. CrossRef
Hematological toxicity in patients with solid malignant tumors treated with radiation – Temporal analysis, dose response and impact on survival
Cynthia Terrones-Campos, Bruno Ledergerber, Ivan Richter Vogelius, Marie Helleberg, Lena Specht, Jens Lundgren
Radiotherapy and Oncology.2021; 158: 175. CrossRef
Prognosis of severe lymphopenia after postoperative radiotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: Results of a long-term follow up study
Wang Jing, Yufei Liu, Hui Zhu, James Welsh, Saumil Gandhi, Melenda Jeter, Quynh Nguyen, Aileen B. Chen, Michael O'Reilly, Zhongxing Liao, Joe Y. Chang, Percy Lee, Steven H. Lin
Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology.2021; 28: 54. CrossRef
Prognostic value of neutrophils for patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma
Lisha Chen, Mengying Li, Ting Xu, Xiufang Qiu, Chuanben Chen
Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology.2021; 6(2): 219. CrossRef
The Influence of Severe Radiation-Induced Lymphopenia on Overall Survival in Solid Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Pim J.J. Damen, Tiuri E. Kroese, Richard van Hillegersberg, Ewoud Schuit, Max Peters, Joost J.C. Verhoeff, Steven H. Lin, Peter S.N. van Rossum
International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics.2021; 111(4): 936. CrossRef
Prognostic Significance of Circulating Lymphocyte Subsets Before Treatment in Patients with Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma
De-Song Shen, Chang Yan, Yu Liang, Kai-Hua Chen, Xiao-Dong Zhu
Cancer Management and Research.2021; Volume 13: 8109. CrossRef
Proton therapy for locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer
Olsi Gjyshi, Zhongxing Liao
The British Journal of Radiology.2020;[Epub] CrossRef
Prognostic role of pretreatment blood lymphocyte count in patients with solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Jiawen Zhao, Weijia Huang, Yongxian Wu, Yihuan Luo, Bo Wu, Jiwen Cheng, Junqiang Chen, Deyun Liu, Chengyang Li
Cancer Cell International.2020;[Epub] CrossRef
Prognosis and Risk Factors of Radiation-Induced Lymphopenia in Early-Stage Lung Cancer Treated With Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy
Qianqian Zhao, Tingting Li, Gang Chen, Zhaochong Zeng, Jian He
Frontiers in Oncology.2020;[Epub] CrossRef
Prediction of Severe Lymphopenia During Chemoradiation Therapy for Esophageal Cancer: Development and Validation of a Pretreatment Nomogram
Peter S.N. van Rossum, Wei Deng, David M. Routman, Amy Y. Liu, Cai Xu, Yutaka Shiraishi, Max Peters, Kenneth W. Merrell, Christopher L. Hallemeier, Radhe Mohan, Steven H. Lin
Practical Radiation Oncology.2020; 10(1): e16. CrossRef
Radiation-induced lymphopenia correlates with survival in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: impact of treatment modality and the baseline lymphocyte count
Xiaoxue Xie, Shenglan Gong, Hekun Jin, Pei Yang, Ting Xu, Yilong Cai, Chengxian Guo, Rong Zhang, Fan Lou, Wenjuan Yang, Hui Wang
Radiation Oncology.2020;[Epub] CrossRef
Lymphopenia after induction chemotherapy correlates with incomplete surgical resection in patients with advanced ovarian cancer
Yasunori Yoshino, Ayumi Taguchi, Maki Takao, Tomoko Kashiyama, Akiko Furusawa, Masaya Uno, Satoshi Okada, Nao Kino, Toshiharu Yasugi
International Journal of Clinical Oncology.2019; 24(4): 428. CrossRef
Radiation-related Lymphopenia after Pelvic Nodal Irradiation for Prostate Cancer
Michael D. Schad, Sunil W. Dutta, Donald M. Muller, Krishni Wijesooriya, Timothy N. Showalter
Advances in Radiation Oncology.2019; 4(2): 323. CrossRef
Clinical predictors of radiation-induced lymphopenia in patients receiving chemoradiation for glioblastoma: clinical usefulness of intensity-modulated radiotherapy in the immuno-oncology era
Hwa Kyung Byun, Nalee Kim, Hong In Yoon, Seok-Gu Kang, Se Hoon Kim, Jaeho Cho, Jong Geol Baek, Jong Hee Chang, Chang-Ok Suh
Radiation Oncology.2019;[Epub] CrossRef
Acute severe lymphopenia by radiotherapy is associated with reduced overall survival in hepatocellular carcinoma
Hwa Kyung Byun, Nalee Kim, Sangjoon Park, Jinsil Seong
Strahlentherapie und Onkologie.2019; 195(11): 1007. CrossRef
Treatment-Related Lymphopenia Predicts Pathologic Complete Response and Recurrence in Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Undergoing Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy
Qiaoqiao Li, Sha Zhou, Shiliang Liu, Songran Liu, Hong Yang, Lei Zhao, Mengzhong Liu, Yonghong Hu, Mian Xi
Annals of Surgical Oncology.2019; 26(9): 2882. CrossRef
Assessing the interactions between radiotherapy and antitumour immunity
Clemens Grassberger, Susannah G. Ellsworth, Moses Q. Wilks, Florence K. Keane, Jay S. Loeffler
Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology.2019; 16(12): 729. CrossRef
Overview of Hematopoietic Stem Cells in Systemic Cancer Treatment, Aging, Pregnancy, and Radiation Hormesis
Aleksei N. Shoutko
Advances in Molecular Imaging.2019; 09(02): 19. CrossRef
Irradiation-Related Lymphopenia for Bone Metastasis from Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Sangjoon Park, Hwa Kyung Byun, Jinsil Seong
Liver Cancer.2019; 8(6): 468. CrossRef
Neutropenia during the First Cycle of Induction Chemotherapy Is Prognostic for Poor Survival in Locoregionally Advanced Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Real-World Study in an Endemic Area
Cheng Xu, Shi-Ping Yang, Yuan Zhang, Ling-Long Tang, Guan-Qun Zhou, Xu Liu, Yan-Ping Mao, Rui Guo, Wen-Fei Li, Lei Chen, Ai-Hua Lin, Ying Sun, Jun Ma
Cancer Research and Treatment.2018; 50(3): 777. CrossRef
Field size effects on the risk and severity of treatment-induced lymphopenia in patients undergoing radiation therapy for solid tumors
Susannah G. Ellsworth
Advances in Radiation Oncology.2018; 3(4): 512. CrossRef
Turning cold tumors into hot tumors: harnessing the potential of tumor immunity using nanoparticles
Anne Rodallec, Guillaume Sicard, Raphaelle Fanciullino, Sébastien Benzekry, Bruno Lacarelle, Gerard Milano, Joseph Ciccolini
Expert Opinion on Drug Metabolism & Toxicology.2018; : 1. CrossRef

PubReader
ePub Link

Cite

CITE: export Copy Download Format; Close

Download Citation

Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

Format:

RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software

Include:

Citation for the content below
Citation and abstract for the content below

The Prognostic Value of Treatment-Related Lymphopenia in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Patients

Cancer Res Treat. 2018;50(1):19-29. Published online April 5, 2017

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2016.595

XML Download

Figure

The Prognostic Value of Treatment-Related Lymphopenia in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Patients

Fig. 1. Variation in median ALC among all patients (A) and subgroups of patients stratified by the pre-ALC (< 1,315 cells/μL vs. ≥ 1,315 cells/μL) (B), mini-ALC (< 390 cells/μL vs. ≥ 390 cells/μL) (C), post-ALC (< 325 cells/μL vs. ≥ 325 cells/μL) (D), post3m-ALC (< 705 cells/μL vs. ≥ 705 cells/μL) (E), and mini-ALC combined with post3m-ALC (lymphopenia vs. nonlymphopenia) (F). ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts; pre-ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts before concurrent chemoradiotherapy; mini-ALC, minimum absolute lymphocyte counts during treatment; post-ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts after completion of treatment; post3m-ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts 3 months after completion of treatment.

Fig. 2. Comparison of patients in the lymphopenia group (mini-ALC < 390 cells/μL and post3m-ALC < 705 cells/μL) with patients in the non-lymphopenia group (mini-ALC ≥ 390 cells/μL or post3m-ALC ≥ 705 cells/μL) in terms of overall survival (A), progression-free survival (B), and distant metastasis-free survival (C). mini-ALC, minimum absolute lymphocyte counts during treatment; post3m-ALC, absolute lymphocyte counts 3 months after completion of treatment.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

The Prognostic Value of Treatment-Related Lymphopenia in Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Patients

Characteristic	Patient (n=413)
Age, median (range, yr)	45 (20-74)
Sex
Male	286 (69.2)
Female	127 (30.8)
T stage
T1	25 (6.1)
T2	61 (14.8)
T3	263 (63.7)
T4	64 (15.5)
N stage
N0	54 (13.1)
N1	183 (44.3)
N2	153 (37.0)
N3	23 (5.6)
Overall stage
II	39 (9.4)
III	290 (70.2)
IVa	63 (15.3)
IVb	21 (5.1)
Family history
Yes	43 (10.4)
No	370 (89.6)
Smoking
Yes	135 (32.7)
No	278 (67.3)
EBV DNA level (copy/mL)
< 4,000	258 (62.5)
≥ 4,000	155 (37.5)
VCA-IgA
< 1:80	100 (24.2)
≥ 1:80	313 (75.8)
EA-IgA
< 1:10	140 (33.9)
≥ 1:10	273 (66.1)
Chemotherapy cycles
2	180
3	233
Treatment days	44 (39-52)
Dose of nasopharynx	69 (68-70)
Dose of neck	64 (60-70)
Pre-ALC (cells/μL)	1,800 (300-4,710)
Mini-ALC (cells/μL)	300 (80-1,400)
Post-ALC (cells/μL)	300 (80-3,000)
Post3m-ALC (cells/μL)	970 (280-3,600)

Factor	5-Yr OS (95% CI, %)	p-value	5-Yr PFS (95% CI, %)	p-value	5-Yr DMFS (95% CI, %)	p-value
Pre-ALC (cells/μL)
< 1,315	79.4 (70.0-88.8)	0.083	68.2 (58.2-78.2)	0.057	78.2 (69.0-87.4)	0.131
≥ 1,315	90.0 (78.6-87.6)		76.5 (71.8-81.2)		83.4 (79.1-87.7)
Mini-ALC (cells/μL)
< 390	79.0 (74.1-83.9)	0.002	72.4 (67.3-77.5)	0.005	80.1 (75.4-84.8)	0.004
≥ 390	90.0 (83.7-96.3)		79.8 (71.0-88.6)		90.9 (85.2-96.6)
Post-ALC (cells/μL)
< 325	79.9 (74.2-85.6)	0.038	73.4 (67.3-79.5)	0.135	79.1 (73.4-84.8)	0.041
≥ 325	83.8 (78.1-89.5)		76.3 (70.0-82.6)		86.0 (80.7-91.3)
Post-ALC (cells/μL)
< 705	69.9 (59.9-79.9)	< 0.001	62.7 (52.5-72.9)	< 0.001	71.4 (61.4-81.4)	0.001
≥ 705	85.3 (81.2-89.4)		78.2 (73.5-82.9)		85.4 (81.3-89.5)
Mini-ALC combined with post3m-ALC
Lymphopenia group	69.4 (59.0-79.8)	< 0.001	61.7 (51.1-72.3)	< 0.001	70.8 (60.4-81.2)	< 0.001
Non-lymphopenia group	90.5 (84.0-97.0)		79.8 (70.8-88.8)		91.4 (85.7-97.1)

Characteristic	Lymphopenia (n=86)	Non-lymphopenia (n=95)	p-value
Age, median (range, yr)	44 (20-65)	46 (23-73)	0.106
Sex
Male	50 (58.1)	64 (67.4)	0.199
Female	36 (41.9)	31 (32.6)
T stage
T1	6 (7.0)	3 (3.2)	0.694
T2	15 (17.4)	16 (16.8)
T3	52 (60.5)	61 (64.2)
T4	13 (15.1)	15 (15.8)
N stage
N0	6 (7.0)	17 (17.9)	0.027
N1	38 (44.2)	48 (50.5)
N2	32 (37.2)	26 (27.4)
N3	10 (11.6)	4 (4.2)
Overall stage
II	11 (12.8)	9 (9.5)	0.452
III	54 (62.8)	67 (70.5)
IVa	13 (15.1)	15 (15.8)
IVb	8 (9.3)	4 (4.2)
Family history
Yes	13 (15.1)	5 (5.3)	0.027
No	73 (84.9)	90 (94.7)
Smoking
Yes	18 (20.9)	31 (32.6)	0.077
No	68 (79.1)	64 (67.4)
EBV DNA level (copy/mL)
< 4,000	45 (52.3)	69 (72.6)	0.005
≥ 4,000	41 (47.7)	26 (27.4)
VCA-IgA
< 1:80	23 (26.7)	23 (24.2)	0.698
≥ 1:80	63 (73.3)	72 (75.8)
EA-IgA
< 1:10	34 (39.5)	29 (30.5)	0.204
≥ 1:10	52 (60.5)	66 (69.5)

Endpoint	Factor	HR (95% CI)	p-value
OS^a)	Post3m-ALC	1.76 (1.12-2.78)	0.015
	Pre-EBV DNA	1.84 (1.20-2.83)	0.005
	N stage	1.35 (1.01-1.79)	0.042
OS^b)	Mini-ALC combined with post3m-ALC	3.79 (1.75-8.19)	0.001
PFS^a)	Post3m-ALC	1.86 (1.23-2.82)	0.003
	Pre-EBV DNA	1.79 (1.23-2.62)	0.002
	N stage	1.30 (1.01-1.67)	0.038
PFS^b)	Mini-ALC combined with post3m-ALC	2.93 (1.59-5.41)	0.001
DMFS^a)	Post3m-ALC	1.87 (1.13-3.08)	0.014
	Pre-EBV DNA	2.03 (1.26-3.27)	0.003
DMFS^b)	Mini-ALC combined with post3m-ALC	3.89 (1.67-9.10)	0.002

Table 1. Characteristics of 413 patients

Values are presented as median (range) or number (%).

Table 2. Survival rates of patients allocated in each ALC group

Table 3. The characteristics of 181 patients (mini-ALC combined with post3m-ALC)

Table 4. Multivariate analyses of the independent significance prognostic factors of clinical outcome

The analysis was performed with the following covariates (413 patients): age, sex, T stage, N stage, family history, smoking, pretreatment EBV DNA level, VCA-IgA, EA-IgA, chemotherapy cycles, dose of nasopharynx, dose of neck, treatment days, pre-ALC, mini-ALC, post-ALC, and post3m-ALC,

The analysis was performed with the following covariates (181 patients): the mini-ALC combined with post3m-ALC (lymphopenia vs. non-lymphopenia), age, sex, T stage, N stage, family history, smoking status, the pretreatment EBV DNA level, the VCA-IgA level, the EA-IgA level, chemotherapy cycles, dose of nasopharynx, dose of neck, and treatment days.