Evaluation of five lymphocyte-based scores for prediction of mortality in hepatitis B virus-associated decompensated cirrhosis.
Decompensated cirrhosis
Hepatitis B virus
Lymphocyte-based score
Mortality
Journal
Heliyon
ISSN: 2405-8440
Titre abrégé: Heliyon
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101672560
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2023
Aug 2023
Historique:
received:
24
05
2023
revised:
14
07
2023
accepted:
20
07
2023
medline:
31
7
2023
pubmed:
31
7
2023
entrez:
31
7
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Lymphocytes are generally accepted to be a key component of the immune response, and an inadequate immune response is closely associated with disease severity and adverse outcomes in hepatitis B virus (HBV)-infected patients. The present study aimed to determine and compare the prognostic values of five lymphocyte-based scores (monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio [MLR], mean platelet volume-to-lymphocyte ratio [MPVLR], neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio [NLR], red cell distribution width-to-lymphocyte ratio [RLR], and C-reactive protein-to-lymphocyte ratio [CLR]) for HBV-associated decompensated cirrhosis (HBV-DC). Data were extracted from an institutional database. The outcome was 30-day mortality. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were conducted, and the resulting area under the curve (AUC) values were used to evaluate the predictive capabilities of the five lymphocyte-based scores for mortality in HBC-DC relative to Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score. The study included 273 patients, and the 30-day mortality was 20.9%. Lymphocyte counts were slightly lower in non-survivors than in survivors. The prognostic values of CLR, NLR, MLR, MPVLR, and RLR for mortality in HBV-DC were different. The predictive powers of NLR and MLR were superior to those of the other three scores and similar to that of MELD score. Multivariate analyses identified NLR, MLR, and MELD score as independent prognostic predictors. High NLR and MLR are easily accessible and reliable indicators for predicting 30-day mortality in HBV-DC and have superior prognostic ability compared with other lymphocyte-based scores.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Lymphocytes are generally accepted to be a key component of the immune response, and an inadequate immune response is closely associated with disease severity and adverse outcomes in hepatitis B virus (HBV)-infected patients. The present study aimed to determine and compare the prognostic values of five lymphocyte-based scores (monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio [MLR], mean platelet volume-to-lymphocyte ratio [MPVLR], neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio [NLR], red cell distribution width-to-lymphocyte ratio [RLR], and C-reactive protein-to-lymphocyte ratio [CLR]) for HBV-associated decompensated cirrhosis (HBV-DC).
Methods
UNASSIGNED
Data were extracted from an institutional database. The outcome was 30-day mortality. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were conducted, and the resulting area under the curve (AUC) values were used to evaluate the predictive capabilities of the five lymphocyte-based scores for mortality in HBC-DC relative to Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score.
Results
UNASSIGNED
The study included 273 patients, and the 30-day mortality was 20.9%. Lymphocyte counts were slightly lower in non-survivors than in survivors. The prognostic values of CLR, NLR, MLR, MPVLR, and RLR for mortality in HBV-DC were different. The predictive powers of NLR and MLR were superior to those of the other three scores and similar to that of MELD score. Multivariate analyses identified NLR, MLR, and MELD score as independent prognostic predictors.
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
High NLR and MLR are easily accessible and reliable indicators for predicting 30-day mortality in HBV-DC and have superior prognostic ability compared with other lymphocyte-based scores.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37520964
doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18556
pii: S2405-8440(23)05764-X
pmc: PMC10374927
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e18556Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Références
Hepatogastroenterology. 2015 Mar-Apr;62(138):368-72
pubmed: 25916065
Clin Lab. 2019 Jan 1;65(1):
pubmed: 30775885
J Oncol. 2020 Nov 25;2020:2895150
pubmed: 33299415
Hepatology. 2018 Jun;67(6):2096-2112
pubmed: 29194722
Lancet. 1980 Sep 20;2(8195 pt 1):615-7
pubmed: 6107408
Cancer Manag Res. 2020 Nov 11;12:11541-11551
pubmed: 33204165
Lab Med. 2022 Nov 3;53(6):e149-e153
pubmed: 35377449
Ann Surg Oncol. 2020 Oct;27(10):4017-4025
pubmed: 32144621
Postgrad Med J. 2013 May;89(1051):294-304
pubmed: 23596257
Middle East J Dig Dis. 2012 Jul;4(3):168-72
pubmed: 24829652
Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci. 2015;52(2):86-105
pubmed: 25535770
Liver Transpl. 2002 Sep;8(9):851-8
pubmed: 12200791
Arab J Gastroenterol. 2011 Dec;12(4):173-7
pubmed: 22305496
J Med Virol. 2020 Oct;92(10):1733-1734
pubmed: 32242950
BMJ Open. 2015 Aug 21;5(8):e008033
pubmed: 26297362
Int J Mol Sci. 2021 Jul 27;22(15):
pubmed: 34360768
BMC Gastroenterol. 2015 Oct 23;15:146
pubmed: 26498833
Cancer Rep (Hoboken). 2021 Jun;4(3):e1330
pubmed: 33586918
Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2016;2016:4394650
pubmed: 26949385
Angiology. 2020 Apr;71(4):360-365
pubmed: 31888345
Liver Int. 2021 Feb;41(2):378-387
pubmed: 32562336
Dig Dis. 2010;28(1):126-32
pubmed: 20460900
J Hepatol. 2006 Jan;44(1):217-31
pubmed: 16298014
Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2020 Jul 02;2020:4107219
pubmed: 32714387
Clin Lab. 2022 Nov 1;68(11):
pubmed: 36377983
Dig Dis Sci. 1986 May;31(5):468-75
pubmed: 3009109
Lancet. 2014 May 17;383(9930):1749-61
pubmed: 24480518
Hepatology. 2014 Jan;59(1):35-45
pubmed: 23728831
Front Med (Lausanne). 2021 Aug 31;8:726950
pubmed: 34532334
Hepatology. 1988 May-Jun;8(3):493-6
pubmed: 3371868
Liver Transpl. 2014 Dec;20(12):1497-507
pubmed: 25205044