High pre-chemoradiotherapy pan-immune-inflammation value levels predict worse outcomes in patients with stage IIIB/C non-small-cell lung cancer

• Published in: Discover. Oncology Vol. 14; no. 1; p. 230
• Main Authors: Topkan, Erkan, Kucuk, Ahmet, Ozkan, Emine Elif, Ozturk, Duriye, Besen, Ali Ayberk, Mertsoylu, Huseyin, Pehlivan, Berrin, Selek, Ugur
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: New York Springer US 13-12-2023; Springer Nature B.V; Springer
• Subjects: Biochemistry; Biological marker; Biomarkers; Blood tests; Cancer Research; Cancer therapies; Chemotherapy; Clinical medicine; Histology; Immunotherapy; Inflammation; Internal Medicine; Lung cancer; Lung diseases; Lymphatic system; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Metastasis; Molecular Medicine; Neutrophils; Non-small-cell lung cancer; Oncology; Pan-immune-inflammation value; Patients; Prognosis survival; Radiotherapy; Surgical Oncology; Tomography; Non-small-cell lung cancer; Biological marker; Prognosis survival; Inflammation; Pan-immune-inflammation value
• DOI: 10.1007/s12672-023-00851-8
• EISSN: 2730-6011

Background and objectives
We explored the prognostic usefulness of the pan-immune-inflammation value (PIV) in patients with stage IIIB/C non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who underwent concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT).
Methods and patients
For all patients, the PIV was calculated using platelet (P), monocyte (M), neutrophil (N), and lymphocyte (L) measures obtained on the first day of CCRT: PIV = P × M × N ÷ L. Using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, we searched for the existence of an ideal cutoff that may partition patients into two groups with unique progression-free- (PFS) and overall survival (OS) results. The primary endpoint of this retrospective cohort research was to determine whether there were any significant relationships between pretreatment PIV measures and post-CCRT OS outcomes.
Results
The present research included a total of 807 stage IIIB/C NSCLC patients. According to ROC curve analysis, the ideal PIV cutoff was 516 [area under the curve (AUC): 67.7%; sensitivity: 66.4%; specificity: 66.1%], which divided the whole cohort into two: low PIV (L-PIV: PIV < 516; N = 436) and high PIV (H-PIV: PIV ≥ 516; N = 371). The comparisons between the PIV groups indicated that either the median PFS (9.2 vs. 13.4 months; P < 0.001) or OS (16.7 vs. 32.7 months; P < 0.001) durations in the H-PIV group were substantially inferior to their L-PIV counterpart. Apart from the H-PIV (P < 0.001), the N
3
nodal stage (P = 0.006), IIIC disease stage (P < 0.001), and receiving only one cycle of concurrent chemotherapy (P = 0.005) were also determined to be significant predictors of poor PFS (P < 0.05, for each) and OS (P < 0.05, for each) outcomes in univariate analysis. The multivariate analysis findings revealed that all four variables had independent negative impacts on PFS (P < 0.05, for each) and OS (P < 0.05, for each).
Conclusions
The findings of this hypothesis-generating retrospective analysis claimed that the novel PIV was an independent and steadfast predictor of PFS and OS in stage IIIB/C NSCLC patients.