Systemic Inflammatory Biomarkers, Especially Fibrinogen to Albumin Ratio, Predict Prognosis in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer

Lin Fang; Fei-Hu Yan; Chao Liu; Jing Chen; Dan Wang; Chun-Hui Zhang; Chang-Jie Lou; Jie Lian; Yang Yao; Bo-Jun Wang; Rui-Yang Li; Shu-Ling Han; Yi-Bing Bai; Jia-Ni Yang; Zhi-Wei Li; Yan-Qiao Zhang

doi:10.4143/crt.2020.330

Articles

Page Path: HOME > Cancer Res Treat > Volume 53(1); 2021 > Article

Original Article Gastrointestinal cancer Systemic Inflammatory Biomarkers, Especially Fibrinogen to Albumin Ratio, Predict Prognosis in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer: Lin Fang^1,2, Fei-Hu Yan¹, Chao Liu^1,2, Jing Chen³, Dan Wang¹, Chun-Hui Zhang¹, Chang-Jie Lou¹, Jie Lian^1,2, Yang Yao^1,2, Bo-Jun Wang^1,2, Rui-Yang Li¹, Shu-Ling Han¹, Yi-Bing Bai¹, Jia-Ni Yang¹, Zhi-Wei Li¹, Yan-Qiao Zhang^1,2; Cancer Research and Treatment : Official Journal of Korean Cancer Association 2021;53(1):131-139.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2020.330
Published online: August 24, 2020

¹Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, Harbin, China

²Translational Medicine Research and Cooperation Center of Northern China, Heilongjiang Academy of Medical Sciences, Harbin, China

³Department of Hematopathology, Anshan Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Anshan, China

Correspondence: Yan-Qiao Zhang, Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, 150 Haping Road, Harbin, Heilongjiang Province 150001, China, Tel,, Fax: 86-0451-86298222, E-mail: yanqiaozhang@ems.hrbmu.edu.cn

Co-correspondence: Zhi-Wei Li, Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital, 150 Haping road, Harbin, Heilongjiang Province 150001, China, Tel,, Fax: 86-0451-86298278, E-mail: lzhw0451@163.com

* Lin Fang and Fei-Hu Yan contributed equally to this work.

• Received: April 18, 2020 • Accepted: August 20, 2020

This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

9,626 Views
200 Download
45 Web of Science
43 Crossref
51 Scopus

prev next

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract

Purpose
Systemic inflammatory response is a critical factor that promotes the initiation and metastasis of malignancies including pancreatic cancer (PC). This study was designed to determine and compare the prognostic value of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), and fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio (FAR) in resectable PC and locally advanced or metastatic PC.
Materials and Methods
Three hundred fifty-three patients with resectable PC and 807 patients with locally advanced or metastatic PC were recruited in this study. These patients were classified into a training set (n=758) and a validation set (n=402). Kaplan-Meier survival plots and Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to analyze prognosis.
Results
Overall survival (OS) was significantly better for patients with resectable PC with low preoperative PLR (p=0.048) and MLR (p=0.027). Low FAR, MLR, NLR (p < 0.001), and PLR (p=0.003) were significantly associated with decreased risk of death for locally advanced or metastatic PC patients. FAR (hazard ratio [HR], 1.522; 95% confidential interval [CI], 1.261 to 1.837; p < 0.001) and MLR (HR, 1.248; 95% CI, 1.017 to 1.532; p=0.034) were independent prognostic factors for locally advanced or metastatic PC.
Conclusion
The prognostic roles of FAR, MLR, NLR, and PLR in resectable PC and locally advanced or metastatic PC were different. FAR showed the most prognostic power in locally advanced or metastatic PC. Low FAR was positively correlated with OS in locally advanced or metastatic PC, which could be used to predict the prognosis.
Key words: Pancreatic neoplasms, Systemic inflammatory markers, Fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio, Prognosis, Survival

Introduction

Pancreatic cancer (PC) has the worst prognosis of all malignant tumors, and shows similar rates for mortality and morbidity [1]. Worldwide, it is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related mortality [2]. Typically, 77% PC patients will be diagnosed with locally advanced or metastatic disease [3]. Although the comprehensive treatment of PC has improved significantly in recent years, its prognosis is still poor, with the 5-year survival rate being < 5% [1]. Therefore, developing appropriate treatment strategies for each patient based on indicators that could predict the prognosis of PC patients remains of clinical significance.

It is established that systemic inflammatory response mediated by circulating inflammatory biomarkers including C-reactive protein [4], neutrophils [5], lymphocytes, platelets [6], monocytes [7], and fibrinogen [8] play an important role in the oncogenesis and development of malignant tumors. Studies have been conducted to evaluate the correlation of popular inflammatory biomarker ratios such as neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR) on overall survival (OS) in PC patients [9,10]. However, very few studies had reported the differences in the prognostic value of NLR, PLR, and MLR in PC patients.

Recently, accumulating evidence has confirmed that the fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio (FAR) is the vital predictor in various malignancies such as esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and chronic lymphocytic leukemia [11,12]. However, association between FAR and the prognosis of PC patients has not been explored to date. Moreover, no literature has discussed the group of resectable PC patients and the group of locally or metastatic PC patients separately when studying association between inflammation and PC prognosis.

We therefore conducted this retrospective analysis to compare the prognostic significance of NLR, PLR, and MLR, FAR in patients with resectable PC and those with locally advanced or metastatic PC, aiming to estimate the independent prognostic factors to predict the biological characteristics and guide individualized comprehensive treatments in PC patients.

Materials and Methods

1. Patients

We enrolled patients with PC who were admitted to the Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital from 2008 to 2018 based on strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) patients voluntarily agreed to participate in the study and signed the informed consent; (2) patients were aged > 18 years; (3) patients had histologically or cytologically confirmed resectable PC or were diagnosed with locally advanced or metastatic PC by clinical data; (4) patients did not receive any other treatments before enrollment; and (5) patients with complete clinicopathologic information and reasonable follow-up time. Patients with infection, inflammation-related diseases, hematological diseases, liver diseases, or other malignant tumors, and incomplete clinicopathologic data were excluded. Finally, 205 patients with resectable PC and 434 with locally advanced or metastatic PC were excluded (S1 Fig.). All included patients (n=1,160) were assigned to either a training set (n=758) or a validation set (n=402). The training set (from 2008 to 2014) included 224 cases of resectable PC and 534 cases of locally advanced or metastatic PC; whereas the validation set (from 2015 to 2018) included 129 cases of resectable PC and 273 cases of locally advanced or metastatic PC.

2. Data collection

The detailed personal basic information and clinicopathologic data of the enrolled patients were obtained by consulting the medical records. The age of the patient was taken as the age at diagnosis. All patients with surgically treated resectable PC underwent TNM staging based on postoperative pathology. The TNM stage referenced was based on the American Joint Committee on Cancer (8th edition). The definition of resectable PC and locally advanced or metastatic PC refers to the criteria defining resectability status per the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (3rd edition 2019). Follow-up was conducted every three months after the patient’s last hospitalization. The primary endpoint OS was defined as the initial diagnosis date to the last follow-up date; the latter was defined as the date of death or the last live follow-up during this study (cut-off May 2019).

3. Blood sample collection and measurements

Routine hematology tests included counts of neutrophils, lymphocytes, monocytes, platelets, plasma fibrinogens and serum albumins. Two milliliters of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid anticoagulated peripheral blood and 2 mL plasma anticoagulated by sodium citrate as well as serum samples were collected before breakfast within 7 days before diagnosis or treatment. The median value of duration between the date of diagnosis and start date of treatment of resectable PC patients was 3 days (range, 2 to 7 days; average, 3.6 days); this value was 2 days (range, 1 to 5 days, average, 2.11 days) in patients with locally advanced or metastatic PC. The samples were promptly centrifuged and processed within two hours. Peripheral blood cell counts were performed using the SYSMEX XN-9000 full-automated hematology analyzer (Sysmex, Tokyo, Japan). Plasma fibrinogen was detected using the Clauss method by the SYSMEX CS-5100 full-automatic coagulation analyzer (Sysmex) and the bromocresol green method by the BECKMAN COULTER Chemistry Analyzer AU5800 (Beckman Coulter Corporation, Tokyo, Japan) was selected to detect the level of albumin.

4. Statistical analysis

SPSS ver. 20.0 statistical software package (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY) and R project ver. 3.6.1 were utilized to establish a database to process clinical data. The “survival ROC” R packages was used to estimate time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (t-ROC) curves.

The maximum Youden index based on t-ROC analysis was used to calculate the optimal cut-off value, and areas under the t-ROC curves (AUCs) were used to evaluate the ability of each inflammatory biomarker to predict the prognosis. Survival curves were drawn according to the Kaplan-Meier method, survival comparison was performed by the log-rank test, and chi-square test was used for comparison between groups. To determine independent prognostic factors, Cox proportional hazards regression models were used for univariate and multivariate analyses. Furthermore, hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidential interval (CI) were used to measure the power between them. All statistical tests were two-sided, and p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

1. Patient characteristics

The detailed baseline characteristics of the resectable PC patients were shown in Table 1. The median follow-up time was 410 days, and 178 patients died during the follow-up period. Among the 224 resectable PC patients enrolled in this study, 138 (61.6%) were male. In 165 patients (73.7%), the tumor was located in the head of the pancreas, and in the remaining 59 patients (26.3%), it was located in the neck, body, or tail of the pancreas. According to the TNM stage, the majority of patients (85.3%) were classified as stage II. The clinicopathological features of resectable PC patients in the validation set are shown in S2 Table.

As shown in Table 2, a total of 534 patients with locally advanced or metastatic PC were selected based on strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. The median follow-up time was 212 days, and 453 patients died during follow-up. Aggressive treatments in 239 patients (44.8%) included first-line chemotherapy, chemoradiotherapy, chemotherapy combined with targeted therapy and participate in clinical trials. The aggressive treatment modalities administered to patients are summarized in S3 Table. The detailed baseline characteristics of locally advanced or metastatic PC patients in the validation set are shown in S4 Table.

2. The optimal cut-off value of NLR, PLR, MLR, and PLR for survival analysis

The t-ROC curves were used to calculate the best cut-off values of NLR, PLR, MLR, and FAR. The optimum cut-off value of preoperative NLR, PLR, MLR, and FAR of resectable PC patients in the training set were 3.09, 139.63, 0.45, and 0.09, respectively. According to the optimum cut-off value, 224 patients with resectable PC were divided into low-value group and high-value group (Table 1). According to the ROC curve analysis of FAR, MLR, NLR, and PLR, 534 patients with locally advanced or metastatic PC were divided into two groups, in which the optimal cut-off value was 0.079, 0.36, 2.61, and 170.73, respectively (Table 2). The detailed data of ROC curve analysis are shown in S5 and S6 Tables.

3. PLR and MLR were associated with prognosis of resectable PC

Survival curves showed that patients in the low PLR (≤ 139.63) and low MLR (≤ 0.45) groups had longer OS than those in the high PLR (> 139.63) (p=0.048) and high MLR (> 0.45) (p=0.027) groups (Fig. 1A and B). However, there were no significant associations between NLR and FAR and prognosis. To test the predictive value of PLR and MLR for OS, we further conducted survival analysis in the validation set. The low PLR (p=0.007) and low MLR (p=0.002) groups had better OS (S7A and S7B Fig.).

Multivariate analysis of the Cox regression model revealed that all inflammatory biomarkers in this study were not independent predictors of OS in resectable PC (S8 Table).

4. FAR, MLR, NLR, and PLR were associated with prognosis of locally advanced or metastatic PC patients

The Kaplan-Meier survival curves indicated that patients in low FAR (p < 0.001), low MLR (p < 0.001), low NLR (p < 0.001), and low PLR (p=0.003) groups had longer OS than those in the respective high-value groups (Fig. 2A–D). We verified this conclusion in the validation set as well. Low FAR (p < 0.001), MLR (p=0.003), NLR (p=0.002), and PLR (p=0.025) were associated with greater OS (S9A–S9D Fig.).

Next, we performed Kaplan-Meier analysis of patients stratified according to treatment modalities. As shown in S10A–S10F Fig., low FAR (p=0.001, p < 0.001), low MLR (p < 0.001, p=0.015), and low NLR (p < 0.001, p=0.044) significantly predicted better OS in patients who did or did not receive aggressive treatments, respectively; whereas, low PLR (p < 0.001) significantly predicted better OS in patients who received aggressive treatments (S10G Fig.). In the group that did not receive aggressive treatments, decreasing PLR was not associated with increased OS (p > 0.05) (S10H Fig.).

Univariate analysis revealed that carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) (HR, 1.466; 95% CI, 1.185 to 1.813; p < 0.001), carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9; HR, 1.299; 95% CI, 1.085 to 1.557; p=0.004), NLR (HR, 1.453; 95% CI, 1.197 to 1.765; p < 0.001), PLR (HR, 1.338; 95% CI, 1.100 to 1.627; p=0.004), MLR (HR, 1.502; 95% CI, 1.253 to 1.800; p < 0.001), and FAR (HR, 1.634; 95% CI, 1.359 to 1.964; p < 0.001) were significantly prognostic factors for locally advanced or metastatic PC. In addition, multivariate analyzes showed CEA (HR, 1.336; 95% CI, 1.067 to 1.673; p=0.012), MLR (HR, 1.248; 95% CI, 1.017 to 1.532; p=0.034), and FAR (HR, 1.522; 95% CI, 1.261 to 1.837; p < 0.001) were independent prognostic factors for locally advanced or metastatic PC (Table 3).

5. The predictive effect of FAR on prognosis was greater than that of MLR, NLR, and PLR

Although the multivariate analysis showed that both FAR and MLR were independent prognostic factors for locally advanced or metastatic PC, the AUC of FAR (0.641) was greater than that of MLR (0.569), NLR (0.558), and PLR (0.548) (Fig. 3B–E). Therefore, the prognostic role of FAR was greater than that of MLR, NLR, and PLR. In addition, we confirmed that the predictive effect of FAR on prognosis was more powerful than that of the fibrinogen and albumin levels (S11 Fig.). Correlation analysis showed that FAR was associated with NLR, PLR, and MLR (p < 0.001) (S12 Table).

However, when we stratified patients based on FAR levels and performed subgroup analysis of prognosis, FAR level was not associated with response to therapy (S13 Fig.).

Discussion

In this study, we provided confirmation that the prognostic value of the same inflammatory marker was different in patients with resectable PC and those with locally advanced or metastatic PC. For instance, low FAR and low NLR were positively associated with locally advanced or metastatic PC but had no significant associations with resectable PC. Thus far, many studies have confirmed that systemic inflammatory markers such as NLR, PLR, and MLR were associated with the prognosis of PC patients. Liu et al. [13] confirmed that low derived NLR was positively correlated with the prognosis of PC patients. Stotz et al. [14] reported that decreased MLR was a significant factor for better cancer-specific survival in PC patients. However, when discussing the relationship between inflammatory markers and prognosis in PC patients, the aforementioned parameters have hardly addressed separately in patients with resectable PC and those with locally advanced or metastatic PC. Nevertheless, our study suggested that the biological behaviors of resectable PC and locally or metastatic PC may be very diverse. When discussing the prognostic factors, different stages of the disease should be discussed discretely.

Recently, studies have shown that tumor-associated inflammation, which is the seventh feature of cancer, is involved in every step of tumorigenesis and cancer progression [15,16]. Inflammatory biomarkers can reflect the severity of systemic inflammation [17]. Mei et al. [9] demonstrated that elevated NLR and MLR were associated with significantly shorter median survival in patients with resectable PC. Qi et al. [18] concluded that high NLR, PLR, and MLR were significantly associated with decreased OS in locally advanced or metastatic PC. However, these studies did not compare the prognostic role of inflammatory biomarkers involved in the study. By performing this study, we demonstrated that the effect on prognostic prediction of FAR was more powerful than MLR, followed by NLR and PLR for locally advanced or metastatic PC patients. To our knowledge, this is the first study to assess the differences in the prognostic role of NLR, PLR, MLR, and FAR between PC patients.

Evidence has shown that systemic inflammation could promote the release of fibrinogen, which can be synthesized by hepatocytes and hepatic malignant cells [19,20]. Many studies have suggested that fibrinogen could promote the proliferation and metastasis of tumor cells by the following mechanisms: involving in the formation of extracellular matrix and inducing epithelial-mesenchymal transition and interleukin (IL)-6 synthesis [21–23]. Albumin not only reflects the nutritional status of cancer patients but also shows association with systemic inflammation [24]. For instance, tumor necrosis factor-α and IL-6 inhibit the synthesis of albumin, causing hypoalbuminemia [25]. Present studies have indicated that hyperfibrinogenemia was significantly correlated with shorter OS in patients with advanced PC and hypoalbuminemia is negatively correlated with prognosis in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma [26–28]. Based on the above studies, researchers were keen to explore whether FAR was also associated with prognosis. A study by Li et al. [29] which showed the cut-off value of FAR as 0.09 proved that low FAR was significantly correlated with favorable OS in patients with non–small cell lung cancer. Liang et al. [30] confirmed that patients with operable soft tissue sarcoma with a decreased FAR had a longer median survival time and a lower 5-year OS rate than those with high FAR, and the cut-off value of FAR in this study was 0.0726. To our best knowledge, the reported FAR cut-off value of 0.079 has been used for the first time to investigate its prognostic power in patients with PC. We also showed that low FAR was positively correlated with OS in patients with locally advanced or metastatic PC. The existing research studies indicate that the best cut-off value varies in different malignancies even with respect to different stages of the disease. Although the specific reason and potential mechanism of these differences remain unclear, they remind us that different tumors and diseases at different stages have their own unique biological behaviors. Therefore, more studies are needed to further verify these conclusions.

Our study has some limitations. First is the study design including retrospective data collection. Second, the relatively small sample size may have lead to a reporting bias Moreover, single-center data analysis cannot represent the overall population. However, despite these limitations, we have confirmed that FAR can be used to predict locally advanced or metastatic PC. A multi-center, large-sample, prospective study is needed to further validate these conclusions.

In conclusion, when discussing the relationship between prognostic factors and PC, different stages of the disease should be discussed separately. FAR might be a potential indicator to predict poor prognosis in locally advanced or metastatic PC patients, and the predictive power of FAR is greater than that of MLR, NLR, and PLR.

Electronic Supplementary Material

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

crt-2020-330_S1Fig.pdf

crt-2020-330_S2Table.pdf

crt-2020-330_S3Table.pdf

crt-2020-330_S4Table.pdf

crt-2020-330_S5Table.pdf

crt-2020-330_S6Table.pdf

crt-2020-330_S7Fig.pdf

crt-2020-330_S8Table.pdf

crt-2020-330_S9Fig.pdf

crt-2020-330_S10Fig.pdf

crt-2020-330_S11Fig.pdf

crt-2020-330_S12Table.pdf

crt-2020-330_S13Fig.pdf

NOTES

Ethical Statement

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital (2018-118-IIT). All patient signed the informed consent before recruitment.

Author Contributions

Conceived and designed the analysis: Fang L, Zhang YQ, Li ZW, Zhang CH, Lou CJ.

Collected the data: Fang L, Yan FH, Liu C, Chen J, Wang D, Lian J, Yao Y, Wang BJ, Li RY, Han SL, Bai YB, Yang JN.

Performed the analysis: Fang L, Yan FH, Liu C, Chen J, Wang D, Lian J, Yao Y, Wang BJ, Li RY, Han SL, Bai YB, Yang JN.

Wrote the paper: Fang L, Zhang YQ, Li ZW, Zhang CH, Lou CJ.

Conflicts of Interest

Conflicts of interest relevant to this article was not reported.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No.81672428, 81872427, and 81773210); the Applied Technology Research and Development Plan of Heilongjiang Province (No.GA19C002); Wujieping Science Foundation of China (No.320.6750.15253); Haiyan Research Fund (No. JJLX2016-01, JJQN2019-07, JJZD2020-03); the Beijing CSCO Clinical Oncology Research (No.Y-MX2016-021, and Y-HS2017-033); Heilongjiang postdoctoral fund (No. LBH-Z18140).

Fig. 1

Kaplan-Meier survival curves of resectable pancreatic cancer (PC) patients in training set based on platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR). (A) Data in training set compares PLR ≤ 139.63 vs. > 139.63 (p < 0.05). (B) Data in training set compares MLR ≤ 0.45 vs. > 0.45 (p < 0.05).

Fig. 2

Kaplan-Meier survival curves of locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer (PC) patients in training set based on fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio (FAR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR). (A) Data in training set compares FAR ≤ 0.079 vs. > 0.079 (p < 0.001). (B) Data in training set compares MLR ≤ 0.36 vs. > 0.36 (p < 0.001). (C) Data in training set compares NLR ≤ 2.61 vs. > 2.61 (p < 0.001). (D) Data in training set compares PLR ≤ 170.73 vs. > 170.73 (p < 0.05).

Fig. 3

Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis based on fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio (FAR) (B), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR) (C), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) (D), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) (E) of locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer patients in training set. (A) The area under the ROC curve (AUC) indicates the diagnostic power of FAR was the most powerful. (B) The AUC indicates the diagnostic power of FAR. In this model, the best cut-off point for FAR was 0.079, AUC was 0.641 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.594 to 0.689), the sensitivity of the Yoden index was 0.635, and the specificity was 0.656. (C) The AUC indicates the diagnostic power of MLR. In this model, the optimal cut-off point for MLR was 0.36, AUC was 0.569 (95% CI, 0.519 to 0.619), the sensitivity of the Yoden index was 0.635, and the specificity was 0.504. (D) The AUC indicates the diagnostic power of NLR. In this model, the optimal cut-off point for NLR was 2.61, AUC was 0.558 (95% CI, 0.507 to 0.609), the sensitivity of the Yoden index was 0.416, and the specificity was 0.721. (E) The AUC indicates the diagnostic power of PLR. In this model, the best cut-off point for PLR was 170.73, AUC was 0.548 (95% CI, 0.498 to 0.598), the sensitivity of the Yoden index was 0.761, and the specificity was 0.341.

Table 1

Clinical and pathological characteristics of 224 resectable PC patients in training set

Characteristic	No. (%)
Sex
Male	138 (61.6)
Female	86 (38.4)
Age (yr)
≤ 65	113 (50.4)
> 65	111 (49.6)
Tumor location
Head	165 (73.7)
Neck, body, and tail	59 (26.3)
Maximum tumor diameter (cm)
≤ 2.9	123 (54.9)
> 2.9	101 (45.1)
Degree of differentiation
Well-moderate	168 (75.0)
Poor	59 (25.0)
T category
1	7 (3.1)
2	64 (28.6)
3	152 (67.9)
4	1 (0.4)
N category
0	132 (58.9)
1	92 (41.1)
TNM
I	31 (13.8)
II	191 (85.3)
III	2 (0.9)
CEA (ng/mL)
≤ 4.42	87 (38.8)
> 4.42	137 (61.2)
CA 19-9 (U/mL)
≤ 49.77	130 (58.0)
> 49.77	94 (42.0)
NLR
≤ 3.09	14 (6.3)
> 3.09	210 (93.8)
PLR
≤ 139.63	117 (52.2)
> 139.63	108 (47.8)
MLR
≤ 0.45	165 (73.7)
> 0.45	59 (26.3)
FAR
≤ 0.09	79 (35.3)
> 0.09	145 (64.7)

CA 19-9, serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; FAR, fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio; MLR, monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio; NLR, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; PC, pancreatic cancer; PLR, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio.

Table 2

Clinical and pathological characteristics of 534 locally and metastatic PC patients in training set

Characteristic	No. (%)
Sex
Male	317 (59.4)
Female	217 (40.6)
Age (yr)
≤ 52	107 (20.0)
> 52	427 (80.0)
Tumor location
Head	232 (43.4)
Neck, body, and tail	302 (56.6)
Distant metastasis
Yes	416 (77.9)
Locally advanced	118 (22.1)
Aggressive treatments
Yes	239 (44.8)
No	295 (55.2)
CEA (ng/mL)
≤ 25.98	417 (78.1)
> 25.98	117 (21.9)
CA 19-9 (U/mL)
≤ 582.9	280 (52.4)
> 582.9	254 (47.6)
NLR
≤ 2.61	175 (32.8)
> 2.61	359 (67.2)
PLR
≤ 170.73	372 (69.7)
> 170.73	162 (30.3)
MLR
≤ 0.36	295 (55.2)
> 0.36	239 (44.8)
FAR
≤ 0.079	238 (44.6)
> 0.079	296 (55.4)

Table 3

Univariate and multivariate analyzes of locally advanced or metastatic PC patients in training set

Characteristic	Univariate analysis		Multivariate analysis

	HR (95% CI)	p-value	HR (95% CI)	Wald	p-value
Sex (male vs. female)	1.025 (0.853–1.231)	0.792	-	-	-

Age (≤ 52 yr vs. > 52 yr)	1.080 (0.803–1.353)	0.501	-	-	-

Tumor location (head vs. neck, body, and tail)	1.007 (0.839–1.207)	0.943	-	-	-

Distant metastasis (yes vs. locally advanced)	0.964 (0.918–1.013)	0.147	-	-	-

Aggressive treatment (yes vs. no)	0.889 (0.742–1.065)	0.210	-	-	-

CEA (≤ 25.98 ng/mL vs. > 25.98 ng/mL)	1.466 (1.185–1.813)	< 0.001	1.336 (1.067–1.673)	6.364	0.012

CA 19-9 (≤ 582.9 U/mL vs. > 582.9 U/mL)	1.299 (1.085–1.557)	0.004	1.160 (0.959–1.404)	2.338	0.126

NLR (≤ 2.61 vs. > 2.61)	1.453 (1.197–1.765)	< 0.001	1.137 (0.909–1.424)	1.262	0.261

PLR (≤ 170.73 vs. > 170.73)	1.338 (1.100–1.627)	0.004	1.121 (0.903–1.391)	1.065	0.302

MLR (≤ 0.36 vs. > 0.36)	1.502 (1.253–1.800)	< 0.001	1.248 (1.017–1.532)	4.505	0.034

FAR (≤ 0.079 vs. > 0.079)	1.634 (1.359–1.964)	< 0.001	1.522 (1.261–1.837)	19.171	< 0.001

CA 19-9, serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; CI, confidence interval; FAR, fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio; HR, hazard ratio; MLR, monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio; NLR, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio; PC, pancreatic cancer; PLR, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio.

REFERENCES

1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69:7–34. Article PubMed
2. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68:394–424. Article PubMed
3. Witkowski ER, Smith JK, Tseng JF. Outcomes following resection of pancreatic cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2013;107:97–103. Article PubMed
4. Cook MB, Barnett MJ, Bock CH, Cross AJ, Goodman PJ, Goodman GE, et al. Prediagnostic circulating markers of inflammation and risk of oesophageal adenocarcinoma: a study within the National Cancer Institute Cohort Consortium. Gut. 2019;68:960–8. Article PubMed
5. Coffelt SB, Wellenstein MD, de Visser KE. Neutrophils in cancer: neutral no more. Nat Rev Cancer. 2016;16:431–46. Article PubMed
6. Ku JH, Kang M, Kim HS, Jeong CW, Kwak C, Kim HH. The prognostic value of pretreatment of systemic inflammatory responses in patients with urothelial carcinoma undergoing radical cystectomy. Br J Cancer. 2015;112:461–7. Article PubMed PMC
7. Huang SH, Waldron JN, Milosevic M, Shen X, Ringash J, Su J, et al. Prognostic value of pretreatment circulating neutrophils, monocytes, and lymphocytes in oropharyngeal cancer stratified by human papillomavirus status. Cancer. 2015;121:545–55. Article PubMed
8. Perisanidis C, Psyrri A, Cohen EE, Engelmann J, Heinze G, Perisanidis B, et al. Prognostic role of pretreatment plasma fibrinogen in patients with solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer Treat Rev. 2015;41:960–70. Article PubMed
9. Mei Z, Shi L, Wang B, Yang J, Xiao Z, Du P, et al. Prognostic role of pretreatment blood neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in advanced cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 66 cohort studies. Cancer Treat Rev. 2017;58:1–13. Article PubMed
10. Sierzega M, Lenart M, Rutkowska M, Surman M, Mytar B, Matyja A, et al. Preoperative neutrophil-lymphocyte and lymphocyte-monocyte ratios reflect immune cell population rearrangement in resectable pancreatic cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24:808–15. Article PubMed
11. Tan Z, Zhang M, Han Q, Wen J, Luo K, Lin P, et al. A novel blood tool of cancer prognosis in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: the Fibrinogen/Albumin Ratio. J Cancer. 2017;8:1025–9. Article PubMed PMC
12. Zou YX, Qiao J, Zhu HY, Lu RN, Xia Y, Cao L, et al. Albumin-to-fibrinogen ratio as an independent prognostic parameter in untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a retrospective study of 191 cases. Cancer Res Treat. 2019;51:664–71. Article PubMed
13. Liu JX, Li A, Zhou LY, Liu XF, Wei ZH, Wang XZ, et al. Significance of combined preoperative serum Alb and dNLR for diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Future Oncol. 2018;14:229–39. Article PubMed
14. Stotz M, Szkandera J, Stojakovic T, Seidel J, Samonigg H, Kornprat P, et al. The lymphocyte to monocyte ratio in peripheral blood represents a novel prognostic marker in patients with pancreatic cancer. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2015;53:499–506. Article PubMed
15. Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell. 2011;144:646–74. Article PubMed
16. Raucci MG, Fasolino I, Caporali M, Serrano-Ruiz M, Soriente A, Peruzzini M, et al. Exfoliated black phosphorus promotes in vitro bone regeneration and suppresses osteosarcoma progression through cancer-related inflammation inhibition. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2019;11:9333–42. Article PubMed
17. Stone ML, Beatty GL. Cellular determinants and therapeutic implications of inflammation in pancreatic cancer. Pharmacol Ther. 2019;201:202–13. Article PubMed PMC
18. Qi Q, Geng Y, Sun M, Wang P, Chen Z. Clinical implications of systemic inflammatory response markers as independent prognostic factors for advanced pancreatic cancer. Pancreatology. 2015;15:145–50. Article PubMed
19. Trinchieri G. Cancer immunity: lessons from infectious diseases. J Infect Dis. 2015;212(Suppl 1):S67–73. Article PubMed PMC
20. Simpson-Haidaris PJ, Rybarczyk B. Tumors and fibrinogen: the role of fibrinogen as an extracellular matrix protein. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2001;936:406–25. PubMed
21. Zhang F, Wang Y, Sun P, Wang ZQ, Wang DS, Zhang DS, et al. Fibrinogen promotes malignant biological tumor behavior involving epithelial-mesenchymal transition via the p-AKT/p-mTOR pathway in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2017;143:2413–24. Article PubMed PDF
22. Shu YJ, Weng H, Bao RF, Wu XS, Ding Q, Cao Y, et al. Clinical and prognostic significance of preoperative plasma hyperfibrinogenemia in gallbladder cancer patients following surgical resection: a retrospective and in vitro study. BMC Cancer. 2014;14:566.Article PubMed PMC PDF
23. Ridker PM, Howard CP, Walter V, Everett B, Libby P, Hensen J, et al. Effects of interleukin-1beta inhibition with canakinumab on hemoglobin A1c, lipids, C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and fibrinogen: a phase IIb randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Circulation. 2012;126:2739–48. Article PubMed
24. Ataseven B, du Bois A, Reinthaller A, Traut A, Heitz F, Aust S, et al. Pre-operative serum albumin is associated with post-operative complication rate and overall survival in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer undergoing cytoreductive surgery. Gynecol Oncol. 2015;138:560–5. Article PubMed
25. Rothschild MA, Oratz M, Schreiber SS. Serum albumin. Hepatology. 1988;8:385–401. Article PubMed
26. Bairey O, Shacham-Abulafia A, Shpilberg O, Gurion R. Serum albumin level at diagnosis of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: an important simple prognostic factor. Hematol Oncol. 2016;34:184–92. Article PubMed
27. Antkowiak M, Gabr A, Das A, Ali R, Kulik L, Ganger D, et al. Prognostic role of albumin, bilirubin, and ALBI scores: analysis of 1000 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing radioembolization. Cancers (Basel). 2019;11:879.Article PubMed PMC
28. Qi Q, Geng Y, Sun M, Chen H, Wang P, Chen Z. Hyperfibrinogen is associated with the systemic inflammatory response and predicts poor prognosis in advanced pancreatic cancer. Pancreas. 2015;44:977–82. Article PubMed
29. Li SQ, Jiang YH, Lin J, Zhang J, Sun F, Gao QF, et al. Albumin-to-fibrinogen ratio as a promising biomarker to predict clinical outcome of non-small cell lung cancer individuals. Cancer Med. 2018;7:1221–31. Article PubMed PMC
30. Liang Y, Wang W, Que Y, Guan Y, Xiao W, Fang C, et al. Prognostic value of the fibrinogen/albumin ratio (FAR) in patients with operable soft tissue sarcoma. BMC Cancer. 2018;18:942.Article PubMed PMC PDF

Figure & Data

REFERENCES

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

Diagnostic Value of Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) in Intrahepatic Cholestasis of Pregnancy
Dandan Ji, Mingyan Sheng, Liuyan Zhang, Yonggui Han, Qi Jiang, Qiongxiao Ruan
British Journal of Hospital Medicine.2025; : 1. CrossRef
Prognostic value of preoperative white blood cell to hemoglobin ratio and fibrinogen to albumin ratio in patients with colorectal cancer
Kang Li, Jing Yan, Haifeng Zhang, Chunlei Lu, Weijia Wang, Mingxiao Guo, Xiaoming Zhang, Zhaoyong Zhang
Medicine.2024; 103(3): e37031. CrossRef
Prognostic value of the fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio (FAR) in patients with chronic heart failure across the different ejection fraction spectrum
Sirui Yang, Jiangyuan Pi, Wenfang Ma, Wenyi Gu, Hongxing Zhang, Anyu Xu, Yanqing Liu, Tao Shi, Fazhi Yang, Lixing Chen
Libyan Journal of Medicine.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (PLR), Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR), Monocyte-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (MLR), and Eosinophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (ELR) as Biomarkers in Patients with Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (AECOPD)
Qian-Qian Liao, Yan-Ju Mo, Ke-Wei Zhu, Feng Gao, Bin Huang, Peng Chen, Feng-Tian Jing, Xuan Jiang, Hong-Zhen Xu, Yan-Feng Tang, Li-Wei Chu, Hai-Ling Huang, Wen-Li Wang, Fang-Ning Wei, Dan-Dan Huang, Bin-Jing Zhao, Jia Chen, Hao Zhang
International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.2024; Volume 19: 501. CrossRef
Nomogram for Predicting Postoperative Pulmonary Metastasis in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Based on Inflammatory Markers
Huanjie Zhou, Haiping Zheng, Ying Wang, Ming Lao, Hong Shu, Meifang Huang, Chao Ou
Cancer Control.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Predictive value of serum albumin levels on cancer survival: a prospective cohort study
Quan Tang, Xu Li, Chun-Rong Sun
Frontiers in Oncology.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Combining systemic inflammatory response index and albumin fibrinogen ratio to predict early serious complications and prognosis after resectable gastric cancer
Jing-Yao Ren, Da Wang, Li-Hui Zhu, Shuo Liu, Miao Yu, Hui Cai
World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology.2024; 16(3): 732. CrossRef
A High Fibrinogen-to-Albumin Ratio on Admission is Associated with Early Neurological Deterioration Following Intravenous Thrombolysis in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke
Shifu Sun, Yongqing Cheng, Lei Li, Honghong Zhu, Changxia Liu, Yongjun Cao
Journal of Inflammation Research.2024; Volume 17: 4151. CrossRef
Meaningful nomograms based on systemic immune inflammation index predicted survival in metastatic pancreatic cancer patients receiving chemotherapy
Yanan Sun, Jiahe Hu, Rongfang Wang, Xinlian Du, Xiaoling Zhang, Jiaoting E, Shaoyue Zheng, Yuxin Zhou, Ruishu Mou, Xuedong Li, Hanbo Zhang, Ying Xu, Yuan Liao, Wenjie Jiang, Lijia Liu, Ruitao Wang, Jiuxin Zhu, Rui Xie
Cancer Medicine.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
The prognostic role of lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Haipeng Li, Shang Peng, Ran An, Nana Du, Huan Wu, Xiangcheng Zhen, Yuanzhi Gao, Zhenghong Li, Jingting Min
PeerJ.2024; 12: e17585. CrossRef
Monocyte to high-density lipoprotein ratio based prognostic nomogram for patients following allogeneic vascular replacement pancreaticoduodenectomy
Xiao-Wen Ye, Zu-Yu Wang, Yun-Xia Shao, Ying-Chun Tang, Xiong-Jun Dong, Ya-Ning Zhu
Frontiers in Genetics.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Inflammation-related markers and prognosis of alpha-fetoprotein producing gastric cancer
Lu Zhang, Yan-Ping Chen, Min Ji, Le-Qian Ying, Chun-Chun Huang, Jing-Yi Zhou, Lin Liu
World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology.2024; 16(9): 3875. CrossRef
Fibrinogen to pre-albumin ratio is an independent prognostic index for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma after radical resection
Shaofei Chang, Yiping Zou, Jing Huang, Zhifei Li, Yuexiang Liang, Song Gao
World Journal of Surgical Oncology.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
Derivation and validation of a preoperative prognostic model for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma
Shuai Xu, Xiu-Ping Zhang, Guo-Dong Zhao, Wen-Bo Zou, Zhi-Ming Zhao, Qu Liu, Ming-Gen Hu, Rong Liu
Hepatobiliary & Pancreatic Diseases International.2023; 22(2): 160. CrossRef
Association between fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio and hemorrhagic transformation after intravenous thrombolysis in ischemic stroke patients
Miaomiao Yang, Lisha Tang, Shijia Bing, Xiangqi Tang
Neurological Sciences.2023; 44(4): 1281. CrossRef
Predictive impact of fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio (FAR) for left ventricular dysfunction in acute coronary syndrome: a cross-sectional study
Xuan Wang, Yi Hu, Hao Luan, Chaodi Luo, Kamila·Kamili, Tingting Zheng, Gang Tian
European Journal of Medical Research.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio percentage: An independent predictor of disease severity and prognosis in anti-N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor encephalitis
Juan Du, Yingzhe Shao, Yajun Song, Kaixin Wang, Xuan Yang, Yanfei Li, Yaobing Yao, Zhe Gong, Yanjie Jia
Frontiers in Neurology.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Diagnostic value of combining preoperative inflammatory markers ratios with CA199 for patients with early-stage pancreatic cancer
Yuanlong Gu, Qianjin Hua, Zhipeng Li, Xingli Zhang, Changjie Lou, Yangfen Zhang, Wei Wang, Peiyuan Cai, Juan Zhao
BMC Cancer.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Systemic immune-inflammation index predicts prognosis and responsiveness to immunotherapy in cancer patients: a systematic review and meta‑analysis
Junyan Kou, Jing Huang, Jun Li, Zhen Wu, Liwei Ni
Clinical and Experimental Medicine.2023; 23(7): 3895. CrossRef
Prognostic analysis of the plasma fibrinogen combined with neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio in patients with non–small cell lung cancer after radical resection
Gao‐Xiang Wang, Zhi‐Ning Huang, Ying‐Quan Ye, Shan‐Ming Tao, Mei‐Qing Xu, Mei Zhang, Ming‐Ran Xie
Thoracic Cancer.2023; 14(15): 1383. CrossRef
Clinical features of patients with MOG-IgG associated disorders and analysis of the relationship between fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio and the severity at disease onset
Yue Li, Sai Wang, Panpan Liu, Jinxiu Ma, Xinjing Liu, Jing Yuan
Frontiers in Neurology.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Low albumin‐to‐fibrinogen ratio predicts adverse clinical outcomes after primary total joint arthroplasty: A retrospective observational investigation
Jingjing Shang, Shijie Jiang, Jinhong Gong, Gongyin Zhao, Dan Su, Liangliang Wang
International Wound Journal.2023; 20(9): 3690. CrossRef
The modified lymphocyte C-reactive protein score is a promising indicator for predicting 3-year mortality in elderly patients with intertrochanteric fractures
Zile He, Chuangxin Zhang, Mingzi Ran, Xin Deng, Zilin Wang, Yanhong Liu, Hao Li, Jingsheng Lou, Weidong Mi, Jiangbei Cao
BMC Geriatrics.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Preoperative Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index is a Potential Biomarker in Adult Patients with High-Grade Gliomas Undergoing Radical Resection
Yu-Ting Jiang, Tian-Cheng Wang, Wei Zhang
Journal of Inflammation Research.2023; Volume 16: 3479. CrossRef
Comparison of the effectiveness of chemotherapy combined with immunotherapy and chemotherapy alone in advanced biliary tract cancer and construction of the nomogram for survival prediction based on the inflammatory index and controlling nutritional status
Zhengfeng Zhang, Dazhen Wang, Jianji Zhang, Yuli Ruan, Lu Zhao, Liu Yang, Ze Liu, Lei Yang, Changjie Lou
Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy.2023; 72(11): 3635. CrossRef
The predictive value of the preoperative albumin‐to‐fibrinogen ratio for postoperative hospital length of stay in liver cancer patients
Fang Li, Yuetong Ren, Jiacheng Fan, Jin Zhou
Cancer Medicine.2023; 12(20): 20321. CrossRef
Inflammatory Markers Showed Significant Incremental Value for Predicting Post-Hepatectomy Liver Failure in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients
Xiao Wang, Wenjun Wang, Xixiang Lin, Xu Chen, Mingxiang Zhu, Hongli Xu, Kunlun He
Life.2023; 13(10): 1990. CrossRef
FAR in systemic lupus erythematosus: a potential biomarker of disease activity and lupus nephritis
Jili Xu, Hongmei Zhang, Nan Che, Hengjin Wang
Clinical and Experimental Medicine.2023; 23(8): 4779. CrossRef
Development and validation of a prognostic nomogram model incorporating routine laboratory biomarkers for preoperative patients with endometrial cancer
Rong Cong, Mingyang Li, Wan Xu, Xiaoxin Ma, Shuhe Wang
BMC Cancer.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Diagnostic roles of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, C-reactive protein, and cancer antigen 125 for ovarian cancer
Liuqing Ye, Guoming Zhou, Lingling Zhou, Dongguo Wang, Shunqiang Xiong, Chibo Liu, Guobing Zhang
Journal of International Medical Research.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
Fibrinogen-to-Albumin Ratio and Long-Term Mortality in Coronary Artery Disease Patients with Different Glucose Metabolism Status
Yun Xie, Xiayan Xu, Dongmei Wang, Yang Zhou, Yu Kang, Wenguang Lai, Hongyu Lu, Jin Liu, Shiqun Chen, Junyan Xu, Xiaoming Yan, Xiaoyu Huang, Yong Liu
Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine.2023;[Epub] CrossRef
ASO Author Reflections: Lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio as prognostic biomarker in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma
Koji Kubota, Akira Shimizu, Yuji Soejima
Annals of Surgical Oncology.2022; 29(2): 1449. CrossRef
Preoperative Peripheral Blood Lymphocyte-to-Monocyte Ratio Predicts Long-Term Outcome for Patients with Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma
Koji Kubota, Akira Shimizu, Tsuyoshi Notake, Hitoshi Masuo, Kiyotaka Hosoda, Koya Yasukawa, Hikaru Hayashi, Kentaro Umemura, Atsushi Kamachi, Takamune Goto, Hidenori Tomida, Shiori Yamazaki, Yuji Soejima
Annals of Surgical Oncology.2022; 29(2): 1437. CrossRef
Management of Pancreatic Cancer and Its Microenvironment: Potential Impact of Nano-Targeting
Nardeen Perko, Shaker A. Mousa
Cancers.2022; 14(12): 2879. CrossRef
A novel online calculator to predict early recurrence and long-term survival of patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma after pancreaticoduodenectomy: A multicenter study
Xiu-Ping Zhang, Yuan-Xing Gao, Shuai Xu, Guo-Dong Zhao, Ming-Gen Hu, Xiang-Long Tan, Zhi-Ming Zhao, Rong Liu
International Journal of Surgery.2022; 106: 106891. CrossRef
Predictive Value of Fibrinogen to Albumin Ratio for the Multivessel-Coronary Chronic Total Occlusion
婷于
Advances in Clinical Medicine.2022; 12(09): 8311. CrossRef
Preoperative peripheral blood inflammatory markers especially the fibrinogen-to-lymphocyte ratio and novel FLR-N score predict the prognosis of patients with early-stage resectable extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma
Shijie Li, Xingli Zhang, Changjie Lou, Yuanlong Gu, Juan Zhao
Frontiers in Oncology.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Fibrinogen-to-Albumin Ratio Predicts Postcontrast Acute Kidney Injury in Patients with Non-ST Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome after Implantation of Drug-Eluting Stents
Yong Qiao, Mingkang Li, Linqing Li, Chengchun Tang, Vijaya Anand
Journal of the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System.2022;[Epub] CrossRef
Identification of prognostic factors and nomogram model for patients with advanced lung cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors
Xiuqiong Chen, Zhaona Li, Jing Zhou, Qianhui Wei, Xinyue Wang, Richeng Jiang
PeerJ.2022; 10: e14566. CrossRef
Diagnostic and Prognostic Value of Neutrophil/Lymphocyte Ratio and Platelet/Lymphocyte Ratios on Acute Pancreatitis Patients
Hasan ERGENÇ, Zeynep ERTÜRK, Ahmet Tarık EMİNLER, Hakan CİNEMRE
Online Türk Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi.2022; 7(1): 80. CrossRef
Prognostic value of albumin-fibrinogen ratio in subarachnoid hemorrhage patients
Xuyang Liu, Zhiyuan Yu, Dingke Wen, Lu Ma, Chao You
Medicine.2021; 100(17): e25764. CrossRef
Prognostic Score System Using Preoperative Inflammatory, Nutritional and Tumor Markers to Predict Prognosis for Gastric Cancer: A Two-Center Cohort Study
Huayang Pang, Weihan Zhang, Xianwen Liang, Ziqi Zhang, Xiaolong Chen, Linyong Zhao, Kai Liu, Danil Galiullin, Kun Yang, Xinzu Chen, Jiankun Hu
Advances in Therapy.2021; 38(9): 4917. CrossRef
Prognostic value of the preoperative fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients undergoing R0 resection
Li-Peng Zhang, Hu Ren, Yong-Xing Du, Cheng-Feng Wang
World Journal of Gastroenterology.2020; 26(46): 7382. CrossRef

PubReader

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

Systemic Inflammatory Biomarkers, Especially Fibrinogen to Albumin Ratio, Predict Prognosis in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer

Cancer Res Treat. 2021;53(1):131-139. Published online August 24, 2020

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4143/crt.2020.330

XML Download

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

Systemic Inflammatory Biomarkers, Especially Fibrinogen to Albumin Ratio, Predict Prognosis in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer

Fig. 1 Kaplan-Meier survival curves of resectable pancreatic cancer (PC) patients in training set based on platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR). (A) Data in training set compares PLR ≤ 139.63 vs. > 139.63 (p < 0.05). (B) Data in training set compares MLR ≤ 0.45 vs. > 0.45 (p < 0.05).

Fig. 2 Kaplan-Meier survival curves of locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer (PC) patients in training set based on fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio (FAR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR). (A) Data in training set compares FAR ≤ 0.079 vs. > 0.079 (p < 0.001). (B) Data in training set compares MLR ≤ 0.36 vs. > 0.36 (p < 0.001). (C) Data in training set compares NLR ≤ 2.61 vs. > 2.61 (p < 0.001). (D) Data in training set compares PLR ≤ 170.73 vs. > 170.73 (p < 0.05).

Fig. 3 Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis based on fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio (FAR) (B), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR) (C), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) (D), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) (E) of locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer patients in training set. (A) The area under the ROC curve (AUC) indicates the diagnostic power of FAR was the most powerful. (B) The AUC indicates the diagnostic power of FAR. In this model, the best cut-off point for FAR was 0.079, AUC was 0.641 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.594 to 0.689), the sensitivity of the Yoden index was 0.635, and the specificity was 0.656. (C) The AUC indicates the diagnostic power of MLR. In this model, the optimal cut-off point for MLR was 0.36, AUC was 0.569 (95% CI, 0.519 to 0.619), the sensitivity of the Yoden index was 0.635, and the specificity was 0.504. (D) The AUC indicates the diagnostic power of NLR. In this model, the optimal cut-off point for NLR was 2.61, AUC was 0.558 (95% CI, 0.507 to 0.609), the sensitivity of the Yoden index was 0.416, and the specificity was 0.721. (E) The AUC indicates the diagnostic power of PLR. In this model, the best cut-off point for PLR was 170.73, AUC was 0.548 (95% CI, 0.498 to 0.598), the sensitivity of the Yoden index was 0.761, and the specificity was 0.341.

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Systemic Inflammatory Biomarkers, Especially Fibrinogen to Albumin Ratio, Predict Prognosis in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer

Table 1

Clinical and pathological characteristics of 224 resectable PC patients in training set

Characteristic	No. (%)
Sex
Male	138 (61.6)
Female	86 (38.4)
Age (yr)
≤ 65	113 (50.4)
> 65	111 (49.6)
Tumor location
Head	165 (73.7)
Neck, body, and tail	59 (26.3)
Maximum tumor diameter (cm)
≤ 2.9	123 (54.9)
> 2.9	101 (45.1)
Degree of differentiation
Well-moderate	168 (75.0)
Poor	59 (25.0)
T category
1	7 (3.1)
2	64 (28.6)
3	152 (67.9)
4	1 (0.4)
N category
0	132 (58.9)
1	92 (41.1)
TNM
I	31 (13.8)
II	191 (85.3)
III	2 (0.9)
CEA (ng/mL)
≤ 4.42	87 (38.8)
> 4.42	137 (61.2)
CA 19-9 (U/mL)
≤ 49.77	130 (58.0)
> 49.77	94 (42.0)
NLR
≤ 3.09	14 (6.3)
> 3.09	210 (93.8)
PLR
≤ 139.63	117 (52.2)
> 139.63	108 (47.8)
MLR
≤ 0.45	165 (73.7)
> 0.45	59 (26.3)
FAR
≤ 0.09	79 (35.3)
> 0.09	145 (64.7)

Table 2

Clinical and pathological characteristics of 534 locally and metastatic PC patients in training set

Characteristic	No. (%)
Sex
Male	317 (59.4)
Female	217 (40.6)
Age (yr)
≤ 52	107 (20.0)
> 52	427 (80.0)
Tumor location
Head	232 (43.4)
Neck, body, and tail	302 (56.6)
Distant metastasis
Yes	416 (77.9)
Locally advanced	118 (22.1)
Aggressive treatments
Yes	239 (44.8)
No	295 (55.2)
CEA (ng/mL)
≤ 25.98	417 (78.1)
> 25.98	117 (21.9)
CA 19-9 (U/mL)
≤ 582.9	280 (52.4)
> 582.9	254 (47.6)
NLR
≤ 2.61	175 (32.8)
> 2.61	359 (67.2)
PLR
≤ 170.73	372 (69.7)
> 170.73	162 (30.3)
MLR
≤ 0.36	295 (55.2)
> 0.36	239 (44.8)
FAR
≤ 0.079	238 (44.6)
> 0.079	296 (55.4)

Table 3

Univariate and multivariate analyzes of locally advanced or metastatic PC patients in training set

Characteristic	Univariate analysis		Multivariate analysis

	HR (95% CI)	p-value	HR (95% CI)	Wald	p-value
Sex (male vs. female)	1.025 (0.853–1.231)	0.792	-	-	-

Age (≤ 52 yr vs. > 52 yr)	1.080 (0.803–1.353)	0.501	-	-	-

Tumor location (head vs. neck, body, and tail)	1.007 (0.839–1.207)	0.943	-	-	-

Distant metastasis (yes vs. locally advanced)	0.964 (0.918–1.013)	0.147	-	-	-

Aggressive treatment (yes vs. no)	0.889 (0.742–1.065)	0.210	-	-	-

CEA (≤ 25.98 ng/mL vs. > 25.98 ng/mL)	1.466 (1.185–1.813)	< 0.001	1.336 (1.067–1.673)	6.364	0.012

CA 19-9 (≤ 582.9 U/mL vs. > 582.9 U/mL)	1.299 (1.085–1.557)	0.004	1.160 (0.959–1.404)	2.338	0.126

NLR (≤ 2.61 vs. > 2.61)	1.453 (1.197–1.765)	< 0.001	1.137 (0.909–1.424)	1.262	0.261

PLR (≤ 170.73 vs. > 170.73)	1.338 (1.100–1.627)	0.004	1.121 (0.903–1.391)	1.065	0.302

MLR (≤ 0.36 vs. > 0.36)	1.502 (1.253–1.800)	< 0.001	1.248 (1.017–1.532)	4.505	0.034

FAR (≤ 0.079 vs. > 0.079)	1.634 (1.359–1.964)	< 0.001	1.522 (1.261–1.837)	19.171	< 0.001

Table 1 Clinical and pathological characteristics of 224 resectable PC patients in training set

Table 2 Clinical and pathological characteristics of 534 locally and metastatic PC patients in training set

Table 3 Univariate and multivariate analyzes of locally advanced or metastatic PC patients in training set