Role of inflammatory factors in prediction of Gleason score and its upgrading in localized prostate cancer patients after radical prostatectomy.

PURPOSE

To investigate the role of inflammatory factors including systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in predicting Gleason Score (GS) and Gleason Score upgrading (GSU) in localized prostate cancer (PCa) after radical prostatectomy (RP).

METHODS

The data of 297 patients who underwent prostate biopsy and RP in our center from January 2014 to March 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Preoperative clinical characteristics including age, values of tPSA, total prostate volume (TPV), f/t PSA ratio, body mass index (BMI), biopsy GS and inflammatory factors including SII, NLR, lymphocyte to monocyte (LMR), neutrophil ratio (NR), platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR), lymphocyte ratio (LR), mean platelet volume (MPV) and red cell distribution (RDW) as well as pathological T (pT) stage were collected and compared according to the grades of RP GS (GS ≤ 6 and GS≥7), respectively. ROC curve analysis was used to confirm the discriminative ability of inflammatory factors including SII, NLR and their combination with tPSA for predicting GS and GSU. By using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis, the association between significant inflammatory markers and grades of GS were evaluated.

RESULTS

Patients enrolled were divided into low (GS ≤ 6) and high (GS≥7) groups by the grades of GS. The median values of clinical factors were 66.08 ± 6.04 years for age, 36.62 ± 23.15 mL for TPV, 26.16 ± 33.59 ng/mL for tPSA and 0.15 ± 0.25 for f/t PSA ratio, 22.34 ± 3.14 kg/m for BMI, 15 (5.1%) were pT1, 116 (39.1%) were pT2 and 166 (55.9%) were pT3. According to the student's t test, patients in high GS group had a greater proportion of patients with pT3 (P<0.001), and higher NLR (P=0.04), SII (P=0.037) and tPSA (P=0.015) compared with low GS group, the distribution of age, TPV, f/t PSA ratio, BMI, LMR, NR, PLR, LR, MPV and RDW did not show any significantly statistical differences. The AUC for SII, NLR and tPSA was 0.732 (P=0.007), 0.649 (P=0.045) and 0.711 (P=0.015), with threshold values of 51l.08, 2.3 and 10.31ng/mL, respectively. According to the multivariable logistic regression models, NLR ≥ 2.3 (OR, 2.463; 95% CI, 0.679-10.469, P=0.042), SII ≥ 511.08 (OR, 3.519; 95% CI 0.891-12.488; P=0.003) and tPSA ≥ 10.31 ng/mL (OR, 4.146; 95% CI, 1.12-15.35; P=0.033) were all independent risk factors associated with higher GS. The AUC for combination of SII, NLR with tPSA was 0.758 (P=0.003) and 0.756 (P=0.003), respectively. GSU was observed in a total of 48 patients with GS ≤ 6 (55.17%). Then patients were divided into 2 groups (high and low) according to the threshold value of SII, NLR, tPSA, SII+tPSA and NLR+tPSA, respectively, when the GSU rates were compared with regard to these factors, GSU rate in high level group was significantly higher than that in low level group, P=0.001, 0.044, 0.017, <0.001 and <0.001, respectively.

CONCLUSION

High SII, NLR and tPSA were associated with higher GS and higher GSU rate. SII was likely to be a more favorable biomarker for it had the largest AUC area compared with tPSA and NLR; the combination of SII or NLR with tPSA had greater values for predicting GS and GSU compared with NLR, SII or tPSA alone, since the AUC area of combination was much higher. SII, NLR were all useful inflammatory biomarkers for predicting GS and detecting GSU among localized PCa patients with biopsy GS ≤ 6.