...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of clinical laboratory analysis. >Combination of preoperative NLR NLR , PLR PLR and CEA CEA could increase the diagnostic efficacy for I‐ III III stage CRC CRC
【24h】

Combination of preoperative NLR NLR , PLR PLR and CEA CEA could increase the diagnostic efficacy for I‐ III III stage CRC CRC

机译:术前NLR NLR,PLR PLR和CEA CEA的组合可以增加I-III III阶段CRC CRC的诊断效果

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background Inflammation plays an important role in the development and progression of CRC . The members of inflammatory biomarkers, preoperative NLR and PLR , have been proved by numerous studies to be promising prognostic biomarkers for CRC . However, the diagnostic value of the two biomarkers in CRC remains unknown, and no study reported the combined diagnostic efficacy of NLR , PLR and CEA . Methods Five hundred and fifty‐nine patients with I‐ III stage CRC undergoing surgical resection and 559 gender‐ and age‐matched healthy controls were enrolled in this retrospective study. NLR and PLR were calculated from preoperative peripheral blood cell count detected using white blood cell five classification by Sysmex XT ‐1800i Automated Hematology System and serum CEA were measured by electrochemiluminescence by ELECSYS 2010. The diagnostic performance of NLR , PLR and CEA for CRC was evaluated by ROC curve. Results Levels of NLR and PLR in the cases were significantly higher than them in the healthy controls. ROC curves comparison analyses showed that the diagnostic efficacy of NLR ( AUC =.755, 95% CI =.728‐.780) alone for CRC was significantly higher than PLR ( AUC =.723, 95% CI =.696‐.749, P =.037) and CEA ( AUC =.690, 95% CI =.662‐.717, P =.002) alone. In addition, the diagnostic efficacy of the combination of NLR , PLR and CEA ( AUC =.831, 95% CI =.807‐.852)for CRC was not only significantly higher than NLR alone but also higher than any combinations of the two of these three biomarkers ( P .05). Moreover, the NLR and PLR in the patients with TNM stage I/ II was higher than that in the healthy controls, and patients with stage III had a higher NLR and PLR than those with stage I/ II , but no significant difference was observed. Conclusion Our study indicated that preoperative NLR could be a CRC diagnostic biomarker, even for early stage CRC , and the combination of NLR , PLR and CEA could significantly improve the diagnostic efficacy.
机译:背景炎症在大肠癌的发展和进展中起着重要作用。炎症生物标志物的成员,术前NLR和PLR,已被大量研究证明是大肠癌有前途的预后生物标志物。然而,这两种生物标志物对大肠癌的诊断价值尚不清楚,也没有研究报道NLR、PLR和CEA的联合诊断效果。方法对559例接受手术切除的I-III期结直肠癌患者和559名性别和年龄匹配的健康对照者进行回顾性研究。NLR和PLR根据术前外周血细胞计数计算,使用Sysmex XT-1800i自动血液学系统的白细胞五分类法检测,并通过ELECSYS 2010的电化学发光法测量血清CEA。用ROC曲线评价NLR、PLR和CEA对大肠癌的诊断价值。结果病例组NLR和PLR水平明显高于健康对照组。ROC曲线对比分析显示,NLR(AUC=.755,95%可信区间=0.728‐0.780)对大肠癌的诊断效果显著高于PLR(AUC=.723,95%可信区间=0.696‐749,P=.037)和CEA(AUC=.690,95%可信区间=0.662‐717,P=.002)。此外,NLR、PLR和CEA联合应用(AUC=0.831,95%CI=0.807‐0.852)对大肠癌的诊断效果不仅显著高于NLR单独应用,而且也高于这三种生物标记物中两种的任何组合(P;0.05)。此外,TNM I/II期患者的NLR和PLR高于健康对照组,III期患者的NLR和PLR高于I/II期患者,但未观察到显著差异。结论我们的研究表明,术前NLR可作为大肠癌的诊断生物标志物,即使是早期大肠癌,NLR、PLR和CEA联合应用可显著提高诊断效果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号