==== Front Dis Markers Dis Markers DM Disease Markers 0278-0240 1875-8630 Hindawi 10.1155/2020/4565379 Review Article The Prognostic Significance of Combined Pretreatment Fibrinogen and Neutrophil-Lymphocyte Ratio in Various Cancers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7993-8891Liu Rongqiang 1 2 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8502-249XZheng Shiyang 3 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5421-1055Yuan Qing 1 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6361-2923Zhu Peiwen 1 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2425-4534Li Biao 1 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9742-1674Lin Qi 1 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9153-5865Shi Wenqing 1 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6680-3936Min Youlan 1 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5403-3295Ge Qianmin 1 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1571-2433Shao Yi freebee99@163.com 1 1Department of Ophthalmology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, 330006 Jiangxi, China 2Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, 510220 Guangdong, China 3Department of Breast Surgery, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 510150, China Academic Editor: Giorgio Ghigliotti 2020 9 12 2020 2020 456537919 10 2019 18 4 2020 7 10 2020 Copyright © 2020 Rongqiang Liu et al.2020This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.Purpose The prognostic value of a new scoring system, termed F-NLR, that combines pretreatment fibrinogen level with neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio has been evaluated in various cancers. However, the results are controversial. The purpose of this study was to comprehensively analyze the prognostic value of F-NLR score in patients with cancers. Methods An integrated search of relevant studies was conducted by screening the PubMed and Embase databases. Pooled hazard ratios, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), for overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS)/progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated to estimate the prognostic significance of F-NLR score in patients with various tumors. A random effects model was used for comprehensive analysis, and subgroup and meta-regression analyses were used to explore sources of heterogeneity. Results Thirteen articles reporting data from of 4747 patients were included in the study. Pooled analysis revealed that high F-NLR score was significantly associated with poor OS (HR = 1.77; 95% CI, 1.51–2.08) and poor DFS/PFS (HR = 1.63; 95% CI, 1.30–2.05). Subgroup and meta-regression analyses did not alter the prognostic role of F-NLR score in OS and DFS/PFS. Conclusions Increased F-NLR score is significantly associated with poor prognosis in patients with cancers and can serve as an effective prognostic indicator. Youth Science Foundation of Jiangxi Province20161BAB21519820151BAB215016Natural Science Key Project of Jiangxi Province20161ACB21017National Natural Science Foundation of China81660158 ==== Body 1. Introduction Increasing evidence suggests that tumor progression is closely associated with inflammatory responses [1–4]. The systemic proinflammatory effects of tumors are considered to be the result and cause by inhibiting apoptosis and promoting angiogenesis and DNA damage [3]. Numerous inflammatory indices, including the systemic immune inflammation index, platelet/lymphocyte ratio, prognostic nutritional index, modified Glasgow prognostic score, and C-reactive protein/albumin ratio, are closely related to prognosis in patients with cancer [5–10]. Fibrinogen is a 340 kDa glycoprotein synthesized by hepatocytes and has an important role in the coagulation process and can be converted to fibrin by activated thrombin. Fibrinogen can promote tumor cell proliferation, angiogenesis, and hematogenous metastasis, and elevated serum fibrinogen levels are associated with poor prognosis in patients with various tumors [11–16]. The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is another useful marker for assessment of the inflammatory response, which is calculated by dividing the neutrophil count by the lymphocyte count. A number of studies have reported that elevated NLR is associated with poor prognosis in patients with various malignancies, including hepatocellular carcinoma, biliary tract cancer, esophageal cancer, prostate cancer, and colon cancer [17–21]. In recent years, a new scoring system, termed F-NLR, that combines pretreatment fibrinogen levels with NLR has gradually become a hot topic. In general, F-NLR score is classified into three groups based on the cutoff value of plasma fibrinogen and NLR, and prognostic situation of patients with cancer is assessed according to different groups. At present, the F-NLR score has been reported as a promising prognostic marker in patients with different types of cancers [22–34]. However, the majority of these studies had small sample sizes; hence, the results are somewhat unreliable and controversial. Here, we conducted a meta-analysis to comprehensively assess the role of F-NLR score in predicting prognosis in patients with cancer. We also discuss whether F-NLR score is a suitable prognostic marker for patients with cancers. 2. Materials and Methods 2.1. Search Strategy We searched for articles in the PubMed and Embase databases until June 2019, using the keywords “fibrinogen and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio.” Titles, abstracts, full texts, and reference lists were carefully screened to identify objective studies. We searched using keywords, without any restrictions, and manually screened the reference lists in identified publications. 2.2. Study Selection Articles were considered eligible if they met the following criteria: (1) they investigated associations of F-NLR score with survival outcome in patients with any type of cancer; (2) they provided sufficient data to allow calculation of hazard ratio (HR) and 95% CI. The exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) they provided insufficient data to allow calculation of HR and 95% CI; (2) they were case reports, animal studies, reviews, letters, abstracts, or non-English language publications. 2.3. Data Extraction and Quality Assessment Two authors extracted the data independently. The relevant information included the first author's name, publication year, country, tumor type, tumor stage, sample size, mean age, analysis type, sex, cutoff value, overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS)/progression-free survival (PFS), hazard ratio, and the corresponding 95% CI. If a study reported the results of both univariate and multivariate analyses, those from multivariate analysis were selected, as this approach considers confounding factors and is more accurate. Each study was assessed for quality, according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS) [35]. This study does not require the approval of the ethics committee. 2.4. Statistical Analysis HR and corresponding 95% CI were used to analyze pooled data. If these statistical variables were described in the study, we used them directly in our analysis; otherwise, data were extracted from graphical survival plots. Data extracted from Kaplan-Meier survival curves were read using Engauge Digitizer version 4.1. A random effects model was used if I2 > 50%; otherwise, a fixed-effects model was used. Subgroup analysis and metaregression were used to explore factors contributing to heterogeneity. Publication bias was analyzed by funnel plot. All analyses were performed using STATA version 12.0 software (Stata Corporation, College Station, TX, USA). P values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant, unless otherwise specified. 3. Results 3.1. Study Characteristics Initial database searching resulted in the retrieval of 185 articles. Titles and abstracts were screened, and abstracts, conference articles, animal experiment studies, and studies reporting incomplete data were excluded. Eventually, 13 articles analyzing the relationship between F-NLR score and outcomes of patients with various cancers were identified. All included articles were published until June 2019. The flow chart for study identification is presented in Figure 1. The total number of patients in the included articles was 4747, with numbers per study ranging from 68 to 1293. In all studies, fibrinogen levels and neutrophil and lymphocyte counts were detected in blood samples. Twelve studies presented OS data and six studies DFS/PFS data. Seven studies were conducted in China, five in Japan, and one in Italy. All studies reported a significant association between high F-NLR score and poor prognosis. The quality of included articles ranged from 6 to 7 (NOS; mean = 6.6). Basic information from all included studies is presented in Table 1. 3.2. F-NLR Score and OS Twelve studies used OS to describe the relationship between F-score and prognosis. The results of the meta-analysis exhibited moderate heterogeneity (P = 0.010, I2 = 55.3%); therefore, we used a random effects model to calculate the pooled HR (95% CI). The results of meta-analysis revealed that high F-NLR score was significantly associated with poor OS, with a pooled HR of 1.77 (95% CI, 1.51–2.08) (Figure 2). 3.3. F-NLR Score and DFS/PFS Six studies also reported DFS/PFS data to document the relationship between F-score and prognosis. We used a random effects model to calculate pooled HR (95% CI) values, based on the detection of clear heterogeneity among the six studies (P = 0.001, I2 = 76.1%). The results showed that high F-NLR score was significantly associated with poor DFS/PFS, with a pooled HR of 1.63 (95% CI, 1.30–2.05) (Figure 3). 3.4. Subgroup and Metaregression Analyses Given the existence of significant heterogeneity among the studies, we performed subgroup and regression analyses according to tumor type, publication year, sample size, country, analysis type, sex, and mean age. Subgroup and metaregression analyses did not alter the prognostic role of F-NLR score in OS and DFS/PFS. We noted slighter heterogeneity in stratified studies according to digestive system tumor, publication year (<2017), sample size (≤390), country (Japan), univariate analysis, or sex (female ≤ 31%) in OS (Table 2). Similarly, we observed no heterogeneity in stratified studies according to age (≤60) and minor heterogeneity in stratified studies with sample size in DFS/PFS (Table 3). 3.5. Sensitivity Analysis and Publication Bias Sensitivity analysis was conducted by removing each study from the combined dataset sequentially. As shown in Figure 4, the results did not differ significantly from the overall analysis, indicating that the outcome was stable. Further, we used funnel plots to evaluate publication bias using total OS or DFS/PFS data. Begg's test and Egger's test were applied to provide statistical evidence for funnel plot symmetry. As shown in Figure 5, Begg's test and Egger's test P values were 0.537 and 0.01 for OS and 0.06 and 0.047 for DFS/PFS, indicating there existed publication bias for either type of report. However, the trim-and-fill method displayed that the pooled HR for OS was 1.47 (95% CI: 1.263-1.732) and 1.58 (95% CI: 1.187-1.916) for DFS/PFS, which further confirmed the results were not affected. 4. Discussion The F-NLR score, based on fibrinogen levels and neutrophil and lymphocyte counts, represents inflammatory responses and the cancer microenvironment. Fibrinogen, an acute-phase response protein, is primarily synthesized in the liver but can also be produced by tumor cells [36]. In particular, tumor cells can promote fibrinogen secretion by producing interleukin-6 [37]. When stimulated with inflammatory factors or by tumors, activated thrombin can transform fibrinogen into fibrin, which can form a stable framework and extracellular matrix around tumor cells, preventing tumor cell killing by immune cells [38]. Further, in vivo tumor metastasis is remarkably diminished in fibrinogen-deficient mice [39]. Neutrophils can promote tumor invasion, metastasis, and angiogenesis by producing various cytokines, such as tumor necrosis factor-alpha, vascular endothelial growth factor, fibroblast growth factor, angiopoietin, and interleukin [40, 41]. Neutrophils can also promote tumor cell metastasis by secreting neutrophil extracellular traps [42]. In addition, elevated neutrophil numbers can prevent other immune cells from killing tumor cells, and high levels of tumor-infiltrating neutrophils are an indicator of poor prognosis in gastric cancer [43]. Lymphocytes have important roles in antitumor immune defense, and lymphocyte reduction can be considered an immune deficiency, in terms of antitumor immune responses. Lymphocytes can promote tumor cell apoptosis and produce cytokines to inhibit tumor cell proliferation and metastasis [44, 45]. A previous study reported that lymphopenia is associated with poor prognosis [46]. Studies have confirmed that fibrinogen or NLR can present a good prognostic indicator for patients with cancer. However, fibrinogen or NLR alone may emerge a limited effect on tumor progression. F-NLR score overcomes the unfavorable effect of fibrinogen and NLR and effectively improves the predicted value for patients with cancers. Liu et al. analyzed 1293 consecutive patients who underwent curative surgery for gastric cancer. They found that higher F-NLR scores were associated with larger tumor size, deeper tumor invasion, and more lymph node metastasis and were independently prognostic predictor [32]. Similarly, Arigami et al. revealed that the F-NLR score correlated with the depth of tumor invasion, lymph node metastasis, lymphatic vessel invasion, tumor size, and stage and was an independent prognostic factor for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma [22]. Wang et al. disclosed that the 5-year DFS rates in F-NLR groups 0, 1, and 2 were 46.7%, 36.4%, and 30.1% and the 5-year overall survival (OS) rates in the above three groups were 52.0%, 39.8%, and 32.1%, respectively. They thought that lung cancer patients with a high-risk preoperative F-NLR group scores may benefit from adjuvant therapy by subgroup analysis [34]. Li et al. showed that an elevated F-NLR score was significantly associated with worse OS and DFS in patients with colorectal adenocarcinoma. They also found that DFS in a low F-NLR score group was significantly shortened after chemotherapy, and patients with a relatively high F-NLR score group showed a slight OS benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy [30]. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first meta-analysis to comprehensively explore the prognostic value of F-NLR score in various tumors. Our meta-analysis demonstrates that high F-NLR score is significantly associated with poor OS, with a pooled HR of 1.77 (95% CI, 1.51–2.08) and poor DFS/PFS (HR = 1.63; 95% CI, 1.30–2.05). Subgroup and metaregression analyses revealed that tumor type, publication year, sample size, country, analysis type, and sex may be sources of heterogeneity in OS, and sample size and age contributed to the heterogeneity in DFS/PFS. Sensitivity analysis and the trim-and-fill method showed that the pooled results were stable. Our meta-analysis has limitations. First, all included articles were from studies with small sample sizes; hence, their results may be somewhat unreliable. Second, the research methods and cutoff values used in included studies differed from one another, which influences judgment of F-NLR score as a prognostic marker. Third, the majority of studies included in the meta-analysis were conducted in three countries, which may affect the reliability of our results. Fourth, we acknowledged that there existed the flaw that only two database engines were used to retrieve data. Fifth, extracting HR and 95% CI from the survival curve may bring slight error. Finally, due to the lack of the additional clinicopathological parameters of selected articles, we cannot assess the relationship between F-NLR scores and other clinicopathological parameters. In conclusion, our meta-analysis demonstrates that increased F-NLR score is significantly associated with poor prognosis in patients with cancer and that F-NLR score can be used as an effective prognostic indicator. However, considering the limitations of this study, further large-scale, well-designed, and multicenter prospective researches are needed to validate our results before the application of F-NLR score for the prognosis of various cancers. Acknowledgments This work was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81660158), Natural Science Key Project of Jiangxi Province (No. 20161ACB21017), and Youth Science Foundation of Jiangxi Province (Nos. 20151BAB215016 and 20161BAB215198). Data Availability All data are in the manuscript and can be obtained from the corresponding author. Conflicts of Interest The authors deny any conflict of interest. Authors' Contributions Rongqiang Liu and Shiyang Zheng have contributed equally to this work. Figure 1 Flow diagram for study screening and selection processes. Figure 2 Forest plot of the relationship between F-score and OS. Figure 3 Forest plot of the relationship between F-score and DFS/PFS. Figure 4 Funnel plot of sensitivity analysis. (a) Sensitivity analysis for OS. (b) Sensitivity analysis for DFS/PFS. Figure 5 Funnel plots for publication bias. (a) Funnel plots without and with trim and fill to evaluate OS data. (b) Funnel plots without and with trim and fill to evaluate DFS/PFS data. Table 1 The basic information of included studies. Study (year) Tumor type Region No. of patients Age (mean year) Cancer stage or grade Definition of F-NLR score End point Quality score Arigami et al. (2015) ESCC Japan 238 65 Stage I-III 2 = F > 400 mg/dL & NLR > 3.0 1 = F > 400 mg/dL or NLR > 3.0 0 = F ≤ 400 mg/dL and NLR ≤ 3.0 OS∗ 7 Arigami et al. (2016a) GC Japan 275 66 Stage I-IV 2 = F > 400 mg/dL & NLR > 3.0 1 = F > 400 mg/dL or NLR > 3.0 0 = F ≤ 400 mg/dL and NLR ≤ 3.0 OS∗ 7 Arigami et al. (2016b) GC Japan 68 66 NR 2 = F > 400 mg/dL & NLR > 3.0 1 = F > 400 mg/dL or NLR > 3.0 0 = F ≤ 400 mg/dL and NLR ≤ 3.0 OS 6 Fu et al. (2017) HCC China 130 49.5 NR 2 = F > 234.5 mg/dL & NLR > 1.84 1 = F > 234.5 mg/dL or NLR > 1.84 0 = F ≤ 234.5 mg/dL and NLR ≤ 1.84 OS, DFS 6 Hao et al. (2019) Glioblastoma China 187 55 NR 2 = F > 340 mg/dL & NLR > 4.1 1 = F > 340 mg/dL or NLR > 4.1 0 = F ≤ 340 mg/dL and NLR ≤ 4.1 OS∗ 7 Huang et al. (2018) NSCLC China 589 60 Stage I-IIIA 2 = F > 348 mg/dL & NLR > 2.3 1 = F > 348 mg/dL or NLR > 2.3 0 = F ≤ 348 mg/dL and NLR ≤ 2.3 OS∗, DFS∗ 7 Kijima et al. (2017) ESCC Japan 98 64.9 Stage III-IV 2 = F > 400 mg/dL & NLR > 3.0 1 = F > 400 mg/dL or NLR > 3.0 0 = F ≤ 400 mg/dL and NLR ≤ 3.0 OS∗ 7 Kuwahara et al. (2018) HPC Japan 111 67 Stage III-IV 2 = F > 341 mg/dL & NLR > 3.59 1 = F > 341 mg/dL or NLR > 3.59 0 = F ≤ 341 mg/dL and NLR ≤ 3.59 OS, PFS 7 Li et al. (2018) CRC China 693 NR Stage I-III 2 = F > 297 mg/dL & NLR > 2.34 1 = F > 297 mg/dL or NLR > 2.34 0 = F ≤ 297 mg/dL and NLR ≤ 2.34 OS, DFS 6 Liang et al. (2019) NSCLC China 456 61 Stage I-IIIA 2 = F > 377 mg/dL & NLR > 2.28 1 = F > 377 mg/dL or NLR > 2.28 0 = F ≤ 377 mg/dL and NLR ≤ 2.28 OS 6 Liu et al. (2018) GC China 1293 59 Stage I-III 2 = F > 400 mg/dL & NLR > 5.0 1 = F > 400 mg/dL or NLR > 5.0 0 = F ≤ 400 mg/dL and NLR ≤ 5.0 OS∗ 7 Marchetti et al. (2018) OC Italy 94 55 Stage I-IV 2 = F > 450 mg/dL & NLR > 3.24 1 = F > 450 mg/dL or NLR > 3.24 0 = F ≤ 450 mg/dL and NLR ≤ 3.24 PFS 6 Wang et al. (2018) NSCLC China 515 60.4 Stage I-IIIA 2 = F > 338 mg/dL & NLR > 2.21 1 = F > 338 mg/dL or NLR > 2.21 0 = F ≤ 338 mg/dL and NLR ≤ 2.21 OS∗, DFS∗ 7 ESCC: esophageal squamous cell carcinoma; GC: gastric cancer; HCC: hepatocellular carcinoma; NSCLC: non-small-cell lung cancer; HPC: hypopharyngeal carcinoma; CRC: colorectal adenocarcinoma; OC: ovarian cancer; OS: overall survival; DFS: disease-free survival; PFS: progression-free survival; ∗multivariate analysis. Table 2 Subgroup analysis and metaregression of the studies reporting the effect of F-NLR score in OS. Stratified study No. of studies Pooled HR (95% CI) Heterogeneity Metaregression I 2 (%) P value Tau2 Adj R2 (%) P value Cancer type 0.04 -11.81 0.77  Digestive system 7 1.817 (1.497-2.206) 0 0.77  NSCLC 4 1.65 (1.266-2.15) 81.9 <0.01  Other type 1 2.103 (1.401-3.156) — — Publication year 0.03 15.36 0.23  ≥2017 7 1.683 (1.389-2.04) 69.3 <0.01  <2017 5 2.121 (1.598-2.817) 0 0.97 Sample size 0.03 29.73 0.11  n ≤ 390 7 2.105 (1.684-2.631) 0 0.99  n > 390 5 1.618 (1.307-2.004) 76 <0.01 Country 0.03 8.8 0.36  China 7 1.715 (1.406-2.092) 71.6 <0.01  Japan 5 2.04 (1.531-2.718) 0 0.99 Analysis type 0.03 6.9 0.37  Multivariate 7 1.676 (1.371-2.049) 58.9 0.02  Univariate 5 1.909 (1.608-2.267) 0 0.43 Gender (Female, %) 0.02 44.22 0.1  >31 7 1.617 (1.35-1.937) 56.7 0.03  ≤31 5 2.12 (1.739-2.585) 0 0.98 Age (year) 0.04 -12.82 0.61  >60 8 1.742 (1.389-2.184) 61.4 0.01  ≤60 4 1.874 (1.445-2.432) 46.7 0.13 Table 3 Subgroup analysis and metaregression of the studies reporting the prognostic role of F-NLR score in DFS/PFS. Stratified study No. of studies Pooled HR (95% CI) Heterogeneity Metaregression I 2 (%) P value Tau2 Adj R2 (%) P value Cancer type 0.13 -35.24 0.9  Digestive system 3 1.875 (1.133-3.102) 76.6 0.01  NSCLC 2 1.32 (1.076-1.619) 68.1 0.08  Other type 1 2.49 (1.618-3.832) — — Publication year 0.04 63.11 0.1  ≥2017 5 1.471 (1.22-1.773) 64.9 0.02  <2017 1 3.26 (1.909-5.567) — — Sample size 0.01 93.11 0.03  n ≤ 390 3 2.383 (1.659-3.422) 37.3 0.2  n > 390 3 1.334 (1.169-1.523) 39 0.19 Country 0.07 25.86 0.34  China 4 1.497 (1.182-1.896) 71.6 <0.01  Japan 1 1.65 (0.969-2.808) — —  Italy 1 2.49 (1.618-3.832) — — Analysis type 0.07 21.85 0.21  Multivariate 2 1.32 (1.076-1.619) 68.1 0.08  Univariate 4 2.005 (1.327-3.031) 75.6 <0.01 Gender (female, %) 0.06 33.39 0.25  >31 4 1.46 (1.189-1.793) 72.6 0.01  ≤31 2 2.318 (1.189-4.517) 68 0.08 Age (year) 0.06 30.42 0.16  >60 3 1.278 (1.12-1.459) 82.9 <0.01  ≤60 3 2.181 (1.304-3.646) 5.8 0.34 ==== Refs 1 Tarocchi M. Polvani S. Marroncini G. Galli A. Molecular mechanism of hepatitis B virus-induced hepatocarcinogenesis World Journal of Gastroenterology 2014 20 33 11630 11640 10.3748/wjg.v20.i33.11630 2-s2.0-84908253441 25206269 2 Hanahan D. Weinberg R. A. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation Cell 2011 144 5 646 674 10.1016/j.cell.2011.02.013 2-s2.0-79952284127 21376230 3 Diakos C. I. Charles K. A. McMillan D. C. Clarke S. J. Cancer-related inflammation and treatment effectiveness The Lancet Oncology 2014 15 11 e493 e503 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70263-3 2-s2.0-84908149118 25281468 4 Coussen L. M. Werb Z. Inflammation and cancer Nature 2002 420 6917 860 867 10.1038/nature01322 2-s2.0-0037180757 12490959 5 Chen J. H. Zhai E. T. Yuan Y. J. Systemic immune-inflammation index for predicting prognosis of colorectal cancer World Journal of Gastroenterology 2017 23 34 6261 6272 10.3748/wjg.v23.i34.6261 2-s2.0-85029591266 28974892 6 Hu Y. Shen J. Liu R. K. Prognostic value of pretreatment prognostic nutritional index in non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis The International Journal of Biological Markers 2018 33 4 372 378 10.1177/1724600818799876 2-s2.0-85060447386 30282502 7 Chen H. Hu N. Chang P. Modified Glasgow prognostic score might be a prognostic factor for hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis Panminerva Medica 2017 59 4 302 307 10.23736/S0031-0808.16.03236-5 2-s2.0-85040342526 28001023 8 Sun F. Ge X. Liu Z. Du S. Ai S. Guan W. Postoperative C-reactive protein/albumin ratio as a novel predictor for short-term complications following gastrectomy of gastric cancer World Journal of Surgical Oncology 2017 15 1 p. 191 10.1186/s12957-017-1258-5 2-s2.0-85049395923 29065877 9 Ozmen S. Timur O. Calik I. Neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) may be superior to C-reactive protein (CRP) for predicting the occurrence of differentiated thyroid cancer Endocrine Regulations 2017 51 3 131 136 10.1515/enr-2017-0013 2-s2.0-85028989865 28858848 10 Song W. Tian C. Wang K. Zhang R. J. Zou S. B. Preoperative platelet lymphocyte ratio as independent predictors of prognosis in pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis PLoS One 2017 12 6, article e0178762 10.1371/journal.pone.0178762 2-s2.0-85020181856 28575033 11 Sheng L. Luo M. Sun X. Lin N. Mao W. Su D. Serum fibrinogen is an independent prognostic factor in operable nonsmall cell lung cancer International Journal of Cancer 2013 133 11 2720 2725 10.1002/ijc.28284 2-s2.0-84884903581 23716344 12 Huang G. Jiang H. Lin Y. Prognostic value of plasma fibrinogen in hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis Cancer Management and Research 2018 10 5027 5041 10.2147/CMAR.S175780 2-s2.0-85057626833 30464603 13 Xu H. Ai J. Z. Tan P. Pretreatment elevated fibrinogen level predicts worse oncologic outcomes in upper tract urothelial carcinoma Asian Journal of Andrology 2020 22 2 177 183 10.4103/aja.aja_38_19 31169138 14 Cai H. X. Li X. Q. Wang S. F. Prognostic value of fibrinogen and D-dimer-fibrinogen ratio in resectable gastrointestinal stromal tumors World Journal of Gastroenterology 2018 24 44 5046 5056 10.3748/wjg.v24.i44.5046 2-s2.0-85057219419 30510379 15 Takeuchi H. Ikeuchi S. Kitagawa Y. Pretreatment plasma fibrinogen level correlates with tumor progression and metastasis in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2007 22 12 2222 2227 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2006.04736.x 2-s2.0-36349029073 18031385 16 Sun Z. Q. Han X. N. Wang H. J. Prognostic significance of preoperative fibrinogen in patients with colon cancer World Journal of Gastroenterology 2014 20 26 8583 8591 10.3748/wjg.v20.i26.8583 2-s2.0-84904400234 25024612 17 Najjar M. Agrawal S. Emond J. Halazun K. Pretreatment neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio: useful prognostic biomarker in hepatocellular carcinoma Journal of Hepatocellular Carcinoma 2018 5 17 28 10.2147/JHC.S86792 29404284 18 Tang H. Lu W. Li B. Li C. Xu Y. Dong J. Prognostic significance of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in biliary tract cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis Oncotarget 2017 8 22 36857 36868 10.18632/oncotarget.16143 28415734 19 Sharaiha R. Z. Halazun K. J. Mirza F. Elevated preoperative neutrophil: lymphocyte ratio as a predictor of postoperative disease recurrence in esophageal cancer Annals of Surgical Oncology 2011 18 12 3362 3369 10.1245/s10434-011-1754-8 2-s2.0-83055176733 21547702 20 Wang Z. Peng S. Xie H. Neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio is a predictor of prognosis in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer: a meta-analysis Cancer Management and Research 2018 10 3599 3610 10.2147/CMAR.S159105 2-s2.0-85057579248 30271208 21 Absenger G. Szkandera J. Pichler M. A derived neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio predicts clinical outcome in stage II and III colon cancer patients British Journal of Cancer 2013 109 2 395 400 10.1038/bjc.2013.346 2-s2.0-84881116763 23820252 22 Arigami T. Okumura H. Matsumoto M. Analysis of the fibrinogen and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a promising blood marker of tumor progression and prognosis Medicine (Baltimore) 2015 94 42, article e1702 10.1097/MD.0000000000001702 2-s2.0-84947922810 26496280 23 Arigami T. Uenosono Y. Matsushita D. Combined fibrinogen concentration and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio as a prognostic marker of gastric cancer Oncology Letters 2016 11 2 1537 1544 10.3892/ol.2015.4049 2-s2.0-84954349633 26893776 24 Arigami T. Uenosono Y. Ishigami S. A novel scoring system based on fibrinogen and the neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio as a predictor of chemotherapy response and prognosis in patients with advanced gastric cancer Oncology 2016 90 4 186 192 10.1159/000444494 2-s2.0-84961233944 26981856 25 Fu S. J. Ji F. Han M. Prognostic value of combined preoperative fibrinogen and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after liver transplantation Oncotarget 2017 8 3 4301 4312 10.18632/oncotarget.13804 2-s2.0-85011985266 27935864 26 Hao Y. Li X. Chen H. A cumulative score based on preoperative neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio and fibrinogen in predicting overall survival of patients with glioblastoma multiforme World Neurosurgery 2019 128 e427 e433 10.1016/j.wneu.2019.04.169 2-s2.0-85067075309 31042598 27 Huang W. Wang S. Zhang H. Zhang B. Wang C. Prognostic significance of combined fibrinogen concentration and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in patients with resectable non-small cell lung cancer Cancer Biology & Medicine 2018 15 1 88 96 10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2017.0124 2-s2.0-85042688786 29545972 28 Kijima T. Arigami T. Uchikado Y. Combined fibrinogen and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio as a prognostic marker of advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma Cancer Science 2017 108 2 193 199 10.1111/cas.13127 2-s2.0-85014020629 27889946 29 Kuwahara T. Takahashi H. Sano D. Fibrinogen and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio predicts survival in patients with advanced hypopharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma Anticancer Research 2018 38 9 5321 5330 10.21873/anticanres.12859 2-s2.0-85052994990 30194184 30 Li X. An B. Zhao Q. Combined fibrinogen and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio as a predictive factor in resectable colorectal adenocarcinoma Cancer Management and Research 2018 10 6285 6294 10.2147/CMAR.S161094 2-s2.0-85057621138 30568490 31 Liang H. G. Gao K. Jia R. Li J. Wang C. Prognostic significance of the combination of preoperative fibrinogen and the neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio in patients with non-small cell lung cancer following surgical resection Oncology Letters 2019 17 2 1435 1444 10.3892/ol.2018.9760 2-s2.0-85059652967 30675197 32 Liu X. Liu Z. Lin E. Chen Y. Sun X. Zhou Z. A cumulative score based on preoperative fibrinogen and the neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio to predict outcomes in resectable gastric cancer Cancer Management and Research 2018 10 3007 3014 10.2147/CMAR.S174656 2-s2.0-85057587658 30214295 33 Marchetti C. Romito A. Musella A. Combined plasma fibrinogen and neutrophil lymphocyte ratio in ovarian cancer prognosis may play a role? International Journal of Gynecological Cancer 2018 28 5 939 944 29538251 34 Wang H. Zhao J. Zhang M. Han L. Wang M. Xingde L. The combination of plasma fibrinogen and neutrophil lymphocyte ratio (F-NLR) is a predictive factor in patients with resectable non small cell lung cancer Journal of Cellular Physiology 2018 28 5 939 944 35 Stang A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses European Journal of Epidemiology 2018 233 5 4216 4224 36 Sahni A. Simpson-Haidaris P. J. Sahni S. K. Vaday G. G. Francis C. W. Fibrinogen synthesized by cancer cells augments the proliferative effect of fibroblast growth factor-2 (FGF-2) Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis 2008 6 1 176 183 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2007.02808.x 2-s2.0-37549035033 17949478 37 Yamaguchi T. Yamamoto Y. Yokota S. Nakagawa M. Ito M. Ogura T. Involvement of lnterleukin-6 in the elevation of plasma fibrinogen levels in lung cancer patients Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology 1998 28 12 740 744 10.1093/jjco/28.12.740 2-s2.0-0032253453 9879291 38 Palumbo J. S. Talmage K. E. Massari J. V. Platelets and fibrin(ogen) increase metastatic potential by impeding natural killer cell-mediated elimination of tumor cells Blood 2005 105 1 178 185 10.1182/blood-2004-06-2272 2-s2.0-11144230059 15367435 39 Palumbo J. S. Kombrinck K. W. Drew A. F. Fibrinogen is an important determinant of the metastatic potential of circulating tumor cells Blood 2000 96 10 3302 3309 10.1182/blood.V96.10.3302 11071621 40 Neagoe P. E. Brkovic A. Hajjar F. Sirois M. G. Expression and release of angiopoietin-1 from human neutrophils: intracellular mechanisms Growth Factors 2009 27 6 335 344 10.3109/08977190903155043 2-s2.0-70450183812 19919521 41 Gregory A. D. Houghton A. M. Tumor-associated neutrophils: new targets for cancer therapy Cancer Research 2011 71 7 2411 2416 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-2583 2-s2.0-79953328298 21427354 42 Cools-Lartigue J. Spicer J. McDonald B. Neutrophil extracellular traps sequester circulating tumor cells and promote metastasis The Journal of Clinical Investigation 2013 123 8 3446 3458 10.1172/JCI67484 2-s2.0-84881249503 43 Zhao J. J. Pan K. Wang W. The prognostic value of tumor-infiltrating neutrophils in gastric adenocarcinoma after resection PLoS One 2012 7 3, article e33655 10.1371/journal.pone.0033655 2-s2.0-84863351557 22442706 44 Offmann T. K. Woracki G. D. Tsukihiro T. Spontaneous apoptosis of circulating T lymphocytes in patients with head and neck cancer and its clinical importance Clinical Cancer Research 2002 8 8 2553 2562 12171883 45 Shi F. Shi M. Zeng Z. PD-1 and PD-L1 upregulation promotes CD8(+) T-cell apoptosis and postoperative recurrence in hepatocellular carcinoma patients International Journal of Cancer 2011 128 4 887 896 10.1002/ijc.25397 2-s2.0-78650621479 20473887 46 Wu E. S. Oduyebo T. Cobb L. P. Lymphopenia and its association with survival in patients with locally advanced cervical cancer Gynecologic Oncology 2016 140 1 76 82 10.1016/j.ygyno.2015.11.013 2-s2.0-84952639050 26571200