Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2015 Jul;70(7):524-30.
doi: 10.6061/clinics/2015(07)10. Epub 2015 Jul 1.

Prognostic value of the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio in lung cancer: A meta-analysis

Affiliations
Review

Prognostic value of the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio in lung cancer: A meta-analysis

Yongmei Yin et al. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2015 Jul.

Abstract

Recently, a series of studies explored the correlation between the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio and the prognosis of lung cancer. However, the current opinion regarding the prognostic role of the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio in lung cancer is inconsistent. We performed a meta-analysis of published articles to investigate the prognostic value of the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio in lung cancer. The hazard ratio (HR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. An elevated neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio predicted worse overall survival, with a pooled HR of 1.243 (95%CI: 1.106-1.397; P(heterogeneity)=0.001) from multivariate studies and 1.867 (95%CI: 1.487-2.344; P(heterogeneity)=0.047) from univariate studies. Subgroup analysis showed that a high neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio yielded worse overall survival in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (HR=1.192, 95%CI: 1.061-1.399; P(heterogeneity)=0.003) as well as small cell lung cancer (SCLC) (HR=1.550, 95% CI: 1.156-2.077; P(heterogeneity)=0.625) in multivariate studies. The synthesized evidence from this meta-analysis of published articles demonstrated that an elevated neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio was a predictor of poor overall survival in patients with lung cancer.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Methodological flow diagram of the meta-analysis.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Forrest plots of studies evaluating HRs of the NLR for OS.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Effect of univariate studies on the pooled HR for the NLR and OS of patients.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Effect of multivariate studies on the pooled HR for the NLR and OS of patients.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Funnel plots adjusted with the trim and fill method for OS. Circles: included studies. Diamonds: presumed missing studies.

References

    1. Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 2013;63((1)):11–30. doi: 10.3322/caac.v63.1. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jemal A, Bray F, Center MM, Ferlay J, Ward E, Forman D. Global cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin. 2011;61((2)):69–90. doi: 10.3322/caac.v61:2. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Gail MH, Eagan RT, Feld R, Ginsberg R, Goodell B, Hill L, et al. Prognostic factors in patients with resected stage I non-small cell lung cancer. A report from the Lung Cancer Study Group. Cancer. 1984;54((9)):1802–13. doi: 10.1002/(ISSN)1097-0142. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hoang T, Xu R, Schiller JH, Bonomi P, Johnson DH. Clinical model to predictsurvival in chemonaive patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer treated with third-generation chemotherapyregimens based on eastern cooperative oncology group data. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23((1)):175–83. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.04.177. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Simon GR, Sharma S, Cantor A, Smith P, Bepler G. ERCC1 expression is a predictor of survival in resected patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Chest. 2005;127((3)):978–83. doi: 10.1378/chest.127.3.978. - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms