Advances in Clinical Medicine
Vol. 13  No. 06 ( 2023 ), Article ID: 67759 , 6 pages
10.12677/ACM.2023.1361425

炎症评分对肝细胞癌化疗栓塞术患者预后价值的研究进展

崔建章,王海久*

青海大学附属医院,肝胆胰外科,青海 西宁

收稿日期:2023年5月25日;录用日期:2023年6月21日;发布日期:2023年6月28日

摘要

肝动脉化疗栓塞术(TACE)在原发性肝癌的治疗中占有重要地位,现阶段对影响TACE患者术后生存的预后因素仍需要进一步探究。相关研究显示,炎症在癌症的发生发展及预后过程中发挥着重要作用,并且炎症反应可以为肿瘤发生、发展和转移提供合适的微环境。因此通过炎症评分对行肝动脉化疗栓塞术(TACE)患者进行预后评估,可能是方便、易获得、低成本和可靠的。本文旨在综述中性粒细胞/淋巴细胞比率(NLR)、血小板/淋巴细胞比率(PLR)、淋巴细胞/单核细胞比率(LMR)、淋巴细胞/C反应蛋白比率(LCR)在肝细胞癌化疗栓塞术(TACE)患者中的预后价值。

关键词

原发性肝癌,肝动脉化疗栓塞术,预后评估,炎症评分

Research Progress on the Prognostic Value of Inflammation Score in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Undergoing Chemoembolization

Jianzhang Cui, Haijiu Wang*

Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Qinghai University, Xining Qinghai

Received: May 25th, 2023; accepted: Jun. 21st, 2023; published: Jun. 28th, 2023

ABSTRACT

Hepatic arterial chemoembolization (TACE) plays an important role in the treatment of primary liver cancer. At present, the prognostic factors affecting postoperative survival of patients with TACE still need to be further explored. Relevant studies have shown that inflammation plays an important role in the occurrence, development and prognosis of cancer, and inflammation can provide a suitable microenvironment for tumor occurrence, development and metastasis. Therefore, the evaluation of prognosis of patients undergoing hepatic arterial chemoembolization (TACE) by inflammation score may be convenient, accessible, low-cost, and reliable. This paper aims to review the prognostic value of neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet/lymphocyte ratio (PLR), lymphocyte/monocyte ratio (LMR), and lymphocyte/C-reactive protein ratio (LCR) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing chemoembolization (TACE).

Keywords:Primary Liver Cancer, Hepatic Arterial Chemoembolization, Prognosis Assessment, Inflammation Score

Copyright © 2023 by author(s) and Hans Publishers Inc.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY 4.0).

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

1. 引言

原发性肝癌,简称肝癌,是全球关注的公共卫生问题。目前,肝癌是全球第七大新发病例和第三大癌症相关死亡原因 [1] 。在我国,原发性肝癌是第4位常见恶性肿瘤及第2位肿瘤致死病因,对我国人民的生命和健康造成了严重威胁 [2] 。原发性肝癌起病隐匿,早期因缺乏典型临床症状而病人难以自觉,致使大多数患者就诊时已进展为中晚期,失去外科手术切除机会,故肝动脉化疗栓塞术(Transcatheter arterial chemoembolization, TACE)在原发性肝癌的治疗中占有重要地位 [3] 。在原发性肝癌诊疗指南中,肝动脉化疗栓塞术(TACE)是巴塞罗那(BCLC)临床肝癌分期中B期患者的首选治疗方法 [4] 。由于当前对影响TACE患者术后生存的预后因素未研究透彻,仍需进一步的探究。相关研究显示,炎症在癌症的发生发展及预后过程中发挥着重要作用,并且炎症反应可以为肿瘤的发生、发展和转移提供合适的微环境 [5] 。炎症评分,如中性粒细胞/淋巴细胞比率(The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, NLR)、血小板/淋巴细胞比率(The platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, PLR)、淋巴细胞/单核细胞比率(The lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio, LMR)、淋巴细胞/C反应蛋白比率(The lymphocyte-to-C reactive protein ratio, LCR),其主要取决于血液循环中的中性粒细胞、淋巴细胞、血小板、单核细胞的计数。中性粒细胞是肿瘤进展过程中的关键媒介,一方面通过分泌血管生成因子促进肿瘤血管形成,另一方面还可通过分泌多种细胞因子促进肿瘤细胞的增殖、转移和逃避免疫反应 [3] 。淋巴细胞则通过各种途径激活机体免疫系统杀伤肿瘤细胞,因此当淋巴细胞数目减少时可能导致肿瘤的发生及发展 [6] 。血小板则通过支持癌症干细胞、诱导血管生成、维持细胞增殖和逃避免疫监视等机制来促进肿瘤的发展 [7] 。单核细胞是人类抗肿瘤免疫的基本成分,因此单核细胞的减少可以削弱免疫系统的抗肿瘤功能,从而促进肿瘤的发生和发展 [8] 。C反应蛋白是一种反映全身炎症的有效指标,但其与肿瘤之间的关系仍需进一步研究。研究表明,较高的炎症评分是否可以考虑成一种肝癌促进状态,从而导致原发性肝癌患者TACE术后的预后不良 [9] 。通过炎症评分来预测TACE治疗对肝癌患者的预后,从而做出更准确的预后分层和个体化治疗将具有重要临床意义。因此,本文将综述以上四种炎症评分在接受肝动脉化疗栓塞术的肝癌患者中的预后价值。

2. 中性粒细胞/淋巴细胞比率(NLR)

中性粒细胞作为一种炎症细胞,虽然在宿主防御中发挥了积极作用,但同时也触发了导致肿瘤的各种机制 [10] 。例如,中性粒细胞可以通过降低对趋化因子的反应和抑制T细胞免疫进而导致免疫抑制,从而间接促进了肿瘤的发生及发展 [11] 。现阶段,中性粒细胞的促癌作用越来越受到研究人员的重视,其一方面通过分泌血管生成因子促进肿瘤血管形成,另一方面还可通过分泌多种细胞因子促进肿瘤细胞的增殖、转移和逃避免疫反应 [12] 。此外,中性粒细胞还通过促进癌细胞的迁移、内渗和外渗,形成转移前的壁龛和癌症复发,使其在癌症的进展和转移过程中发挥了关键作用 [13] 。

淋巴细胞通过各种途径激活机体免疫系统杀伤肿瘤细胞,因此当淋巴细胞数目减少时则可能导致肿瘤发生、发展 [14] 。肿瘤相关抗原可以被肿瘤浸润性T淋巴细胞识别,从而触发抗肿瘤免疫反应 [15] 。虽然高淋巴细胞计数预示着更好的预后和更好的肝细胞癌存活率,但淋巴细胞计数低则与预后不良相关 [16] 。

目前,中性粒细胞/淋巴细胞比率(NLR)已被建议作为癌症患者的独立预后指标,以及全身炎症反应的标记 [17] 。一项研究预测TACE术后肝癌患者1年内病情进展的时间相关ROC分析显示NLR的临界值为1.7,其Kaplan-Meier分析显示,当NLR值 ≥ 1.7时,患者病情进展时间较短,且OS降低 [18] 。在一项包括46名接受药物洗脱微珠(DEB)-TACE治疗的初治肝癌患者的回顾性研究中,基线NLR值较高预示着DEB-TACE后较差的肿瘤反应和较短的无进展生存期(PFS) [19] 。在一项对接受TACE治疗作为B期肝癌一线治疗的初治患者的回顾研究中,多变量Logistic回归分析发现,TACE后6个月的疾病进展可以通过基线NLR值 ≥ 3来预测 [20] 。肖等人的荟萃分析显示,术前高NLR与初次接受TACE治疗的肝细胞癌患者的OS显著相关,也与血管侵犯、多发性肿瘤和血清甲胎蛋白水平高(≥400 ng/mL)等因素显著相关 [21] 。此外,高NLR与更具侵袭性的肝癌表型相关,而后者又与不良的OS和糟糕的预后密切相关。肖等人发现,许多NLR分界值(1.9、3-4、4和5)与原发性肝癌的不良OS在统计学上相关,在分析研究中,NLR分界值为5是最常用的,因此NLR是一种方便、容易获得、低成本和可靠的生物标志物,对接受TACE治疗的肝癌患者具有预后意义 [22] 。然而,不同的研究使用的NLR临界值和所分析的不同的肝细胞癌亚群不同,从而导致研究之间的异质性,并增加了对NLR在临床实践中使用的困惑。因此,需要对大量患者行进一步研究,从而更好地确定最合适的NLR临界值。

3. 血小板/淋巴细胞比率(PLR)

血小板除具有作为止血效应的经典作用外,另一方面则具有保护肿瘤细胞免受自然杀伤细胞的溶解和促进肿瘤细胞转移的作用 [23] 。相关研究显示,PLR升高表明炎症反应被激活,刺激转录因子如核转录因子-kB (NF-kB)、信号转导和转录激活因子3 (STAT3)、低氧诱导因子1-α (HIF-1A)和促炎细胞因子包括肿瘤坏死因子(TNF) α、IL-1b和IL-6。这些蛋白质在肿瘤细胞的增殖、存活、迁移和侵袭、促进上皮−间充质转化、血管生成、转移和化疗反应中发挥关键作用 [24] 。

薛等人发现,PLR可以用于预测接受TACE治疗的肝癌患者的不良生存。当PLR值为150时可作为预测肝细胞癌患者行TACE预后的临界值。此外,巨大肝癌(直径超过10 cm)首次化疗栓塞术前计算的基线PLR值 > 150可以预测OS。高PLR组的12、24和36个月生存率(分别为22.6%、8.1%和4.1%)显著低于低PLR组(分别为35.6%、22.4%和14%) [25] 。张等人研究发现,PLR中位数为100时,与高PLR组相比,低PLR组的OS和PFS则得到显著改善 [26] 。一项回顾性试验招募了接受DEB-TACE治疗的肝癌患者,以评估炎症评分,如PLR,是否与肿瘤反应和从治疗前对比增强磁共振成像中提取的放射学特征相关。有趣的是,较高的基线PLR预示着较差的肿瘤反应(p = 0.004)和较短的PFS (p < 0.001)。与基线成像相比,高PLR与非结节肿瘤的生长相关(p < 0.001) [27] 。因此,PLR可能代表着一种有效、廉价、获得广泛、可重复和可靠的预测反应和生存的生物标志物。目前,需要更多的临床研究来得出更有力的结论,这些结论可能对临床实践具有重要意义。

4. 淋巴细胞/单核细胞比率(LMR)

淋巴细胞通过各种途径激活机体免疫系统杀伤肿瘤细胞,因此当淋巴细胞数目减少时可能导致肿瘤发生、发展 [28] 。相关研究表明,肿瘤浸润性淋巴细胞的存在与提高各种癌症的存活率有关 [29] 。肿瘤相关巨噬细胞(TAMs)是起源于血液循环的单核细胞亚群,由于肿瘤趋化因子的释放而在肿瘤周围被激活 [30] 。因此,LMR可以作为淋巴细胞和单核细胞的生物标记物,也可以作为影响癌症患者预后的影响因素 [31] 。一项研究发现,在肝细胞癌患者中,低LMR与PD-L1的表达之间有统计学意义的相关性,即假设如果检测到低LMR,则可以怀疑肝细胞癌微环境中单核细胞衍生细胞水平的增加,从而导致肝癌细胞PD-L1表达水平增加,以响应免疫细胞分泌的细胞因子。因此,没有显著PD-L1表达的高LMR被发现是影响肝癌患者肝切除术后总生存期(OS)改善和无复发生存(RFS)的预后因素 [32] 。除此之外,LMR可被认为是预测接受抗PD-1药物治疗的患者预后的早期指标 [31] 。

一项回顾性研究发现,与术前LMR较高的患者相比,术前LMR较低的肝癌患者表现出更具侵袭性的行为,包括更大的肿瘤体积和更高的血清AFP浓度 [32] 。在一项对180名患者的回顾性评估中,基线高NLR和低LMR的组合对于预测TACE术后肝细胞癌的OS是有价值的 [33] 。一项对128例仅接受TACE作为初始治疗的中期肝癌患者的回顾性研究中,高LMR组和低LMR组(LMR截断值为4.4)之间的PFS差异具有统计学意义 [34] 。因此,术前LMR可能代表了抗肿瘤免疫反应和促瘤功能之间的平衡 [35] ,作为炎症反应的一个指标,它具有简单、快速、可操作、特异和敏感的检测方法的特点,对包括TACE患者在内的肝癌患者具有一定的预后意义。

5. 淋巴细胞/C反应蛋白比率(LCR)

C反应蛋白(CRP)是一种蛋白质,可以使用定性、半定量和定量方法从血液样本中测得,其主要由健康的肝细胞和肝癌细胞合成,并以五聚体的形式分泌到血浆中 [36] 。CRP可以通过激活血管内皮细胞从而允许血小板、中性粒细胞和血液蛋白(例如,IL-6、IL-1b和CRP)进入组织中以激活抗肿瘤反应 [37] 。此外,CRP不但可以促进细胞毒性T淋巴细胞介导的细胞溶解机制,还可以发挥持续促炎和促肿瘤免疫微环境的作用。C反应蛋白/白蛋白比率(CAR)代表了肝细胞癌患者预后的炎症标志物,可以用来预测肝癌治疗后的复发 [38] 。

Lu等人评估了LCR在预测接受TACE治疗的肝细胞癌患者的OS中的作用 [39] 。1625名患者参加了上述研究,其中55.7%的患者LCR值6000分以上。LCR > 6000的患者1年和3年OS率分别为71.9%和32.4%,而LCR < 6000的患者分别为40.1%和13.7% (p < 0.001)。在除肝外转移的患者外,LCR是这一亚组患者中OS改善的独立预后因素(HR = 1.45, p < 0.001)。此外,LCR在表现不同肝功能和肿瘤特征的不同肝癌患者亚组之间的风险分层中具有区别性 [39] 。

6. 讨论

炎症评分是肿瘤间质微环境与免疫反应之间关系的生物标志物,已被认为是方便、易得、低成本、可靠的生物标志物,与接受TACE治疗的肝癌患者的预后相关,但是其可能受到许多因素的影响,如年龄、体重指数、败血症、类固醇药物、酒精性脂肪肝、营养不良、糖尿病和出血等因素的影响,因此在解释结果时应考虑这些因素。此外,慢性疾病如丙型肝炎和乙肝感染的治疗也会影响炎症评分。通过控制混杂因素和进行随机对照研究将有助于提高炎症评分作为预后因素的特异性。研究炎症评分和TACE治疗反应之间的关系,对于识别早期TACE治疗的困难/失败,从而为患者提供量身定制的治疗方法至关重要。因此,临床上通过炎症评分来预测原发性肝癌患者行TACE的预后,需要多中心、大样本的研究,以进一步实现高水平的临床相关性,从而巩固炎症评分在临床实践中的应用。

文章引用

崔建章,王海久. 炎症评分对肝细胞癌化疗栓塞术患者预后价值的研究进展
Research Progress on the Prognostic Value of Inflammation Score in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Undergoing Chemoembolization[J]. 临床医学进展, 2023, 13(06): 10182-10187. https://doi.org/10.12677/ACM.2023.1361425

参考文献

  1. 1. Sung, H., Ferlay, J., Siegel, R.L., et al. (2021) Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 71, 209-249. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21660

  2. 2. Zhou, M., Wang, H., Zeng, X., et al. (2019) Mortality, Morbidity, and Risk Factors in China and Its Provinces, 1990-2017: A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. The Lancet, 394, 1145-1158. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30427-1

  3. 3. Crocetti, L., Bargellini, I. and Cioni, R. (2017) Lo-co-Regional Treatment of HCC: Current Status. Clinical Radiology, 72, 626-635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2017.01.013

  4. 4. Chen, W., Zheng, R., Baade, P.D., et al. (2016) Cancer Statistics in China, 2015. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 66, 115-132. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21338

  5. 5. Ko, Y.J., Kwon, Y.M., Kim, K.H., et al. (2012) High-Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein Levels and Cancer Mortality. Cancer Epide-miology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 21, 2076-2086. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-12-0611

  6. 6. Llovet, J.M., Brú, C. and Bruix, J. (1999) Prognosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: The BCLC Staging Classification. Seminars in Liver Disease, 19, 329-338. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-1007122

  7. 7. Greten, F.R. and Grivennikov, S.I. (2019) Inflammation and Cancer: Triggers, Mechanisms, and Consequences. Immunity, 51, 27-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2019.06.025

  8. 8. Zhou, L., Rui, J.A., Wang, S.B., et al. (2011) Prognostic Fac-tors of Solitary Large Hepatocellular Carcinoma: The Importance of Differentiation Grade. European Journal of Surgical Oncology, 37, 521-525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2011.03.137

  9. 9. Oh, B.S., Jang, J.W., Kwon, J.H., et al. (2013) Prognostic Value of C-Reactive Protein and Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma. BMC Cancer, 13, Article No. 78. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-13-78

  10. 10. Keizman, D., Ish-Shalom, M., Huang, P., et al. (2012) The Associa-tion of Pre-Treatment Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio with Response Rate, Progression Free Survival and Overall Sur-vival of Patients Treated with Sunitinib for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma. European Journal of Cancer, 48, 202-208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2011.09.001

  11. 11. Tazzyman, S., Lewis, C.E. and Murdoch, C. (2009) Neutrophils: Key Mediators of Tumour Angiogenesis. International Journal of Experimental Pathology, 90, 222-231. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2613.2009.00641.x

  12. 12. Mantovani, A., Cassatella, M.A., Costantini, C., et al. (2011) Neutrophils in the Activation and Regulation of Innate and Adaptive Immunity. Nature Reviews Immunology, 11, 519-531. https://doi.org/10.1038/nri3024

  13. 13. Franco, A.T., Corken, A. and Ware, J. (2015) Platelets at the Inter-face of Thrombosis, Inflammation, and Cancer. Blood, 126, 582-588. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2014-08-531582

  14. 14. Mano, Y., Aishima, S., Fujita, N., et al. (2013) Tu-mor-Associated Macrophage Promotes Tumor Progression via STAT3 Signaling in Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Pathobi-ology, 80, 146-154. https://doi.org/10.1159/000346196

  15. 15. Cho, E.J., Yu, S.J., Lee, Y.B., et al. (2022) Prognostic Values of Inflammation-Based Scores and Fibrosis Markers in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated with Transarterial Chemoembolization. Diagnostics (Basel), 12, Article No. 1170. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12051170

  16. 16. Venet, F. and Monneret, G. (2018) Advances in the Under-standing and Treatment of Sepsis-Induced Immunosuppression. Nature Reviews Nephrology, 14, 121-137. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrneph.2017.165

  17. 17. Xiong, S., Dong, L. and Cheng, L. (2021) Neutrophils in Cancer Carcinogenesis and Metastasis. Journal of Hematology & Oncology, 14, Article No. 173. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13045-021-01187-y

  18. 18. Lee, W., Ko, S.Y., Mohamed, M.S., et al. (2019) Neutrophils Facilitate Ovarian Cancer Premetastatic Niche Formation in the Omentum. Journal of Experimental Medicine, 216, 176-194. https://doi.org/10.1084/jem.20181170

  19. 19. Gajewski, T.F., Schreiber, H. and Fu, Y.X. (2013) Innate and Adaptive Immune Cells in the Tumor Microenvironment. Nature Immunology, 14, 1014-1022. https://doi.org/10.1038/ni.2703

  20. 20. Schreiber, R.D., Old, L.J. and Smyth, M.J. (2011) Cancer Immunoediting: In-tegrating Immunity’s Roles in Cancer Suppression and Promotion. Science, 331, 1565-1570. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1203486

  21. 21. Motomura, T., Shirabe, K., Mano, Y., et al. (2013) Neutro-phil-Lymphocyte Ratio Reflects Hepatocellular Carcinoma Recurrence after Liver Transplantation via Inflammatory Mi-croenvironment. Journal of Hepatology, 58, 58-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhep.2012.08.017

  22. 22. Templeton, A.J., Mcnamara, M.G., Šeruga, B., et al. (2014) Prog-nostic Role of Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio in Solid Tumors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 106, dju124. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/dju124

  23. 23. Faloppi, L., Bianconi, M., Memeo, R., et al. (2016) Lactate Dehydrogenase in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Something Old, Something New. BioMed Research International, 2016, Article ID: 7196280. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/7196280

  24. 24. Schobert, I.T., Savic, L.J., Chapiro, J., et al. (2020) Neutro-phil-to-Lymphocyte and Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratios as Predictors of Tumor Response in Hepatocellular Carcinoma after DEB-TACE. European Radiology, 30, 5663-5673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06931-5

  25. 25. Chu, H.H., Kim, J.H., Shim, J.H., et al. (2021) Neutro-phil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio as a Biomarker Predicting Overall Survival after Chemoembolization for Intermediate-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Cancers (Basel), 13, Article No. 2830. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13112830

  26. 26. Xiao, W.K., Chen, D., Li, S.Q., et al. (2014) Prognostic Significance of Neutrophil-Lymphocyte Ratio in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis. BMC Cancer, 14, Article No. 117. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-14-117

  27. 27. Nieswandt, B., Hafner, M., Echtenacher, B., et al. (1999) Lysis of Tumor Cells by Natural Killer Cells in Mice Is Impeded by Platelets. Cancer Research, 59, 1295-1300.

  28. 28. Xue, T.C., Jia, Q.A., Ge, N.L., et al. (2015) The Platelet-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Predicts Poor Survival in Patients with Huge Hepa-tocellular Carcinoma That Received Transarterial Chemoembolization. Tumor Biology, 36, 6045-6051. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13277-015-3281-x

  29. 29. Väyrynen, J.P., Tuomisto, A., Klintrup, K., et al. (2013) Detailed Analysis of Inflammatory Cell Infiltration in Colorectal Cancer. British Journal of Cancer, 109, 1839-1847. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2013.508

  30. 30. Chanmee, T., Ontong, P., Konno, K., et al. (2014) Tumor-Associated Macrophages as Major Players in the Tumor Microenvironment. Cancers (Basel), 6, 1670-1690. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers6031670

  31. 31. Xiao, L., Li, L., Chen, G., et al. (2020) The Lymphocyte-to-Monocyte Ratio Could Predict the Efficacy of PD-1 Inhibitors in Patients with Advanced Cancer. Translational Cancer Research, 9, 4111-4120. https://doi.org/10.21037/tcr-20-1451

  32. 32. Itoh, S., Yugawa, K., Shimokawa, M., et al. (2019) Prognostic Signifi-cance of Inflammatory Biomarkers in Hepatocellular Carcinoma Following Hepatic Resection. BJS Open, 3, 500-508. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50170

  33. 33. Liu, J., Zhang, W., Niu, R., et al. (2020) A Combination of the Preopera-tive Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte and Lymphocyte-to-Monocyte Ratios as a Useful Predictor of Survival Outcomes Fol-lowing the Transarterial Chemoembolization of Huge Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Saudi Medical Journal, 41, 376-382. https://doi.org/10.15537/smj.2020.4.24911

  34. 34. Liu, Y., Shi, M., Chen, S., et al. (2021) Intermediate Stage Hepa-tocellular Carcinoma: Comparison of the Value of Inflammation-Based Scores in Predicting Progression-Free Survival of Patients Receiving Transarterial Chemoembolization. Journal of Cancer Research and Therapeutics, 17, 740-748. https://doi.org/10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_29_21

  35. 35. Gong, J., Jiang, H., Shu, C., et al. (2019) Prognostic Value of Lym-phocyte-to-Monocyte Ratio in Ovarian Cancer: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Ovarian Research, 12, Article No. 51. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13048-019-0527-z

  36. 36. Arcone, R., Gualandi, G. and Ciliberto, G. (1988) Identification of Sequences Responsible for Acute-Phase Induction of Human C-Reactive Protein. Nucleic Acids Research, 16, 3195-3207. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/16.8.3195

  37. 37. Hart, P.C., Rajab, I.M., Alebraheem, M., et al. (2020) C-Reactive Pro-tein and Cancer-Diagnostic and Therapeutic Insights. Frontiers in Immunology, 11, Article ID: 595835. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.595835

  38. 38. Kinoshita, A., Onoda, H., Imai, N., et al. (2015) The C-Reactive Protein/Albumin Ratio, a Novel Inflammation-Based Prognostic Score, Predicts Outcomes in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma. Annals of Surgical Oncology, 22, 803-810. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-4048-0

  39. 39. Lu, L.H., Zhong, C., Wei, W., et al. (2021) Lymphocyte-C-Reactive Protein Ratio as a Novel Prognostic Index in Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: A Multicentre Cohort Study. Liver International, 41, 378-387. https://doi.org/10.1111/liv.14567

  40. NOTES

    *通讯作者。

期刊菜单