Skip to main content
Journal of Cancer logoLink to Journal of Cancer
. 2020 Apr 27;11(15):4332–4342. doi: 10.7150/jca.44545

Blood-based Markers in the Prognostic Prediction of Esophagogastric Junction Cancer

Can-Tong Liu 1,2, Chao-Qun Hong 3, Xu-Chun Huang 1,2, En-Min Li 4, Yi-Wei Xu 1,2,, Yu-Hui Peng 1,2,
PMCID: PMC7255356  PMID: 32489452

Abstract

Esophagogastric junction cancer poses a great threat to human beings both in western countries and East Asia, especially in China and Japan, and its incidence has increased during recent decades. The 5-year survival rate of esophagogastric junction cancer is quite poor compared with that of other gastric cancer sites. Until now, the traditional TNM staging system has been widely used in clinical practice for prognosis. However, the TNM system is based on pathology after surgical resection or radiology using CT and MRI, not on blood markers. Evidently, some research has been reported concentrated on the prognostic value of blood-based markers with the character of non-invasive and non-radioactive in EJA. Hematologic, biochemical and coagulation parameters could be obtained from clinical data and utilized to analyze their prognostic values. Tumor-associated antigens, microRNAs and circulating tumor cells have also been reported in EJC prognosis. In this article, we review research focused on blood-based markers to evaluate their prognostic value in esophagogastric junction cancer, especially its main subtype adenocarcinoma.

Keywords: esophagogastric junction cancer, blood-based marker, prognosis

Introduction

Esophageal cancer and gastric cancer are two common malignant diseases, ranking sixth and ninth, respectively, in the incidence of cancers worldwide 1. Esophagogastric junction cancer (EJC), whose main type is adenocarcinoma (EJA), is a malignant tumor with the center located within a 10-centimeter distance between the esophagus and stomach. In recent decades, the incidences of these two cancers have decreased, but EJC has instead increased in both East Asia and western countries 2. EJC was first described by Siewert in 1998 3 and has unique biological characteristics. Gastroesophageal reflux disease and Helicobacter pylori are associated with the increased risk of suffering from EJC 4, 5, and Barrett's esophagus (BE) is recognized as the precancerous lesion of adenocarcinoma in western countries 6.

The clinical manifestation of most patients suffering from EJC is dysphagia, which only becomes symptomatic at an advanced stage. With asymptomatic characteristics and the unpopularity of endoscope screening for early-stage EJC, Chinese patients tend to be diagnosed in the advanced stage 7. Serosal invasion, lymph node metastasis and hematogenous recurrence are more likely to appear in EJC compared with the distant gastric cancer 8, which might be the reason why the 5-year overall survival (OS) rates of advanced stage EJC patients, who had undergone curative therapy, is less than 30%9, lower than that of cancers occurring in other sites of the stomach. Although chemoradiotherapy does assist in improving the survival time in locally advanced EJC, the 5-year OS rates still remain low, ranging from 23% to 38% 10.

The American Joint Committee on Cancer Eighth Edition Cancer Staging Manual is widely used to predict the probable survival rate of esophageal cancer and EJC 11. When staging EJC, tumors with centers no more than 2 centimeters into the gastric cardia are staged as esophageal carcinomas, while those with more than 2 centimeters are staged as gastric cancers. The latter used to be named gastric cardia cancer, the Siewert type III. The traditional TNM staging system, containing invasive depth, regional node metastasis and distant metastasis, is based on pathology after surgery or endoscopy, or computerized tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. When determining whether distant metastasis occurs, positron emission tomography is usually used. However, not included is any information from blood, an easily accessed, non-invasive and non-radioactive source.

Blood can be used to evaluate inflammation and nutritional status by testing its contents. After centrifugation, evaluation in serum and plasma of tissue function, such as liver and renal function, and coagulation function, can be determined. In the case of tumors, tumor-associated RNAs, proteins or cells, recognized as tumor-associated markers, will be released into the peripheral blood and can be utilized to assist in diagnosis and determination of the prognosis of cancers 12. Positive detection of tumor candidates might indicate the existence of cancers, and their different concentrations might lead to different survival times. Recent concerns have arisen in the area of prognostic analysis of EJC based on blood-based markers. Here, we review relevant literatures on the value of blood-based markers for prognostic prediction in EJC.

Hematologic Parameters

The complete blood cell count (CBC) is a common method for evaluating inflammation and nutritional status. It can be completed in a few minutes after sampling without a complex and expensive facility. Therefore, its use is widespread in community hospitals. In the last few years, inflammation has been accepted as a hallmark in cancer progression and prognosis, and it can be evaluated with blood parameters, such as leukocytes 13. Some parameters, including neutrophils and lymphocytes, have been discovered to be prognostic factors in many cancers 14. Erythrocytes and platelets are generated from marrow, and their related parameters can show the function of marrow hematopoiesis, hinting at potential prognostic value of tumors.

From Figure 1A, among research involving CBC, the neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) are two of the most popular criteria in predicting prognosis of EJC. As shown in Table 1, increased NLR is one of the most frequently observed markers in EJC 15-18. With cutoff values varying from 1.84 - 4.00, the NLR might act as a potential marker in predicting the survival rate of patients with EJC 19-26, especially for patients who have undergone surgery. The NLR has been found to be correlated to tumor size 21, age 22 and T stage 24. Although most of these studies involved a small sample size of patients, Wang et al. conducted a large-sample study (435 EJA patients in 1498 gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma patients) and showed that pretreatment NLR, as a continuous variable, can predict cancer-specific survival (CSS) independently in resectable EJA patients regardless of whether or not patients received neoadjuvant therapy 24. Moreover, Zhang et al. found that a NLR value higher than 3.5 independently led to a poor overall survival of Siewert type II/III EJA (355 EJA patients) 21. A larger study (611 EJA patients) performed by Zhang et al. suggested that NLR was associated with CSS, but does not play a vital role in predicting CSS of Siewert type II/III EJA27. Among these studies, NLR was correlated with T and N stages 24 and patients with NLR higher than 3 had a short overall survival time in stages IIB and III 22. Therefore, it is important to further explore the predictive value of the NLR for predicting prognosis of EJA in a large-sample and multi-center study.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Dot diagrams of the number of studies involving blood-based hematologic parameters (A), and biochemical and coagulation parameters (B).

Table 1.

Blood-based hematologic parameters in EJC prognosis

Variables Authors Number of EJC Patients Cutoff Values Survival Types Hazard Ratio 95% Confidence Interval P-Value
NLR Cong X19 129 1.84 OS 1.820 1.316-2.517 a<0.001
Conway AM22 316 3 TTP 1.48 1.09-2.03 0.013
OS 1.56 1.15-2.11 0.005
Custodio A20 155 4 OS 1.2086 1.0366-1.4091 0.0155
8 OS 1.4598 1.1177-1.9064 0.0055
Grenader T25 227 3 OS 1.67 1.45-1.93 <0.001
Jagadesham VP34 105 2.78 MS - - d0.061
Jomrich G40 320 2.07 OS - - <0.05
DFS - - <0.05
Kudou K49 59 2.26 OS 3.069 1.420-7.157 a0.0041
Noble F26 138 2.5 OS 1.191 1.092-1.298 <0.0001
DFS 1.070 0.958-1.194 0.230
Tianxing G56 129 1.89 OS 0.985 0.669-1.388 0.930
Urabe M59 87 con OS 0.97 0.89-1.07 0.56
DFS 1.01 0.92-1.10 0.87
Wang SC24 435 con CSS 1.10 1.05-1.13 <0.0001
Wang Y60 215 2.2 OS 1.118 0.805-1.550 b0.506
Yuan D23 327 5 OS 2.551 1.847-3.524 <0.0001
DFS 2.743 2.073-3.630 <0.0001
Zhang JW27 611 2.22 CSS 1.00 0.94-1.07 b-
Zhang L21 355 3.5 OS 2.303 1.617-3.280 0.000
Zhou WJ35 309 1.697 OS - - b>0.05
PLR Cong X19 129 110 OS 1.238 0.807-1.900 0.327
Jagadesham VP34 105 158 MS - - d0.038
Jomrich G40 320 146.8 OS - - <0.05
DFS - - <0.05
Kudou K49 59 165 OS 1.971 0.909-4.160 0.0843
Messager M33 56 192 OS 2.47 1.21-5.01 0.012
DFS 2.85 1.54-5.26 0.001
Noble F26 138 132.36 OS 1.002 1.000-1.005 0.056
DFS 1.000 0.997-1.003 0.841
Tianxing G56 129 - OS 1.396 0.843-2.311 0.194
Urabe M59 87 con OS 1.01 0.86-1.19 0.90
DFS 0.97 0.84-1.13 0.73
Wang Y60 215 130.8 OS 1.256 0.905-1.742 b0.173
Yuan D23 327 150 OS 1.284 0.897-1.838 b0.172
300 OS 1.398 0.872-2.241 b0.164
150 DFS 1.338 0.979-1.829 b0.068
300 DFS 1.352 0.887-2.062 b0.161
Zhang JW27 611 124.4 CSS 1.00 1.00-1.00 -
Zhang L21 355 171 OS 1.124 0.789-1.062 0.517
Zhou WJ35 309 96.960 OS 1.188 0.795-1.775 0.402
LMR Cong X19 129 3.25 OS 0.820 0.576-1.167 0.271
Urabe M59 87 con OS 0.98 0.91-1.06 0.64
DFS 0.98 0.92-1.06 0.68
Zhang JW27 611 0.223 CSS 2.68 0.85-8.43 0.092
Zhou WJ35 309 0.201 OS 1.604 1.071-2.402 0.022
SII Cong X19 129 451 OS 1.040 0.668-1.618 0.863
Jomrich G40 320 644 OS - - <0.001
DFS - - <0.001
PLT Bando H36 14 150 OS - - 0.76
Chau I38 248 median OS 0.955 0.839-1.086 b0.482
Jagadesham VP34 105 275 MS - - b0.425
Noble F26 138 226 OS 1.000 0.997-1.003 0.837
DFS 1.000 0.997-1.002 0.761
Yuan D23 327 - OS 1.045 0.835-1.308 b0.701
DFS 1.033 0.846-1.260 b0.752
NE Fuchs CS37 - - OS 1.52 1.17-1.99 <0.0001
Noble F26 138 4 OS - - 0.811
DFS 1.096 0.972-1.237 0.136
Yuan D23 327 - OS 1.110 0.901-1.368 b0.328
DFS 1.184 0.985-1.424 b0.073
LY Fuchs CS37 - - OS c1.31 1.05-1.63 0.0015
Noble F26 138 1.7 OS 0.885 0.687-1.139 0.342
DFS 1.036 0.845-1.271 0.731
Yuan D23 327 - OS 0.838 0.648-1.083 b0.177
DFS 0.810 0.650-1.011 b0.062
WBC Chau I38 248 - OS - - 0.06
Noble F26 138 - OS 1.074 0.982-1.175 0.118
DFS 1.063 0.968-1.167 0.200
Yuan D23 327 - OS 0.977 0.764-1.246 b0.850
DFS 1.027 0.829-1.272 b0.807
HGB Bando H36 14 100 g/l OS - - b0.127
Chau I38 248 110 g/l OS - - 0.011
Han WX48 101 120 g/l OS 1.000 0.527-1.899 1.000
Jomrich G43 314 - OS 0.98 0.90-1.06 0.591
DFS 0.99 0.92-1.07 0.775
Larsen AC47 170 - OS - - b-
Tianxing G56 129 - OS - - b0.095
Zhang L21 355 120 g/l OS 0.943 0.671-1.318 0.730
Zhu Z41 239 130 g/l OS 0.689 0.501-0.946 0.021
MCV Jomrich G43 314 - OS 1.05 1.03-1.08 <0.001
DFS 1.05 1.03-1.08 <0.001
MCH Jomrich G43 314 - OS 1.14 1.07-1.22 <0.001
DFS 1.12 1.05-1.20 <0.001
MCHC Jomrich G43 314 - OS 1.17 1.07-1.28 0.001
DFS 1.17 1.07-1.27 <0.001
RDW Jomrich G43 314 - OS 0.98 0.93-1.04 0.538
DFS 0.99 0.94-1.05 0.794
HCT Cao HL45 156 - OS c5.353 3.419-8.380 <0.001

EJC: esophagogastric junction cancer; NLR: neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio; PLR: platelet-lymphocyte ratio; LMR: lymphocyte-monocyte ratio; SII: systemic immune-inflammation score; PLT: platelet; NE: neutrophil count; LY: lymphocyte count; WBC: white blood cell; HGB: hemoglobin; MCV: mean corpuscular volume; MCH: mean corpuscular hemoglobin; MCHC: mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration; RDW: red blood cell distribution width; HCT: hematocrit; OS: overall survival; DFS: disease-free survival; CSS: cancer-specific survival; TTP: time to progression; MS: median survival; con: continuous variable

a statistical significance in univariate analysis; b no statistical significance in univariate analysis; c the HR of low level; d not included in the multivariate analysis

Note: the units for PLT, NE, LY and WBC are 109/l; the unit for RBC is 1012/l.

Thrombosis is frequent in cancer patients, resulting in high morbidity and mortality 28, and platelets participate in the process. Platelets coordinate in the immune system and affect cancer-related inflammation by changing the activation status of the endothelium and recruiting leukocytes to tumor sites 29. It is reported that lymphocytes are vital for cancer immune-surveillance and immune-editing 30. PLR, a combination of platelets and lymphocytes, has been found to be a prognostic factor in different cancers 31, 32. In EJA patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy, Messager et al. found that an elevated PLR (PLR > 192) is associated independently with decreased disease-free survival (DFS; hazard ratio [HR] = 2.85, 95% CI: 1.54 - 5.26, p = 0.001) and overall survival (OS; HR = 2.47, 95% CI: 1.21 - 5.01, p = 0.012) 33. Another study suggested a significant p-value of PLR (p = 0.038) in univariate analysis, but failed to further evaluate the independent probability 34. Nevertheless, Zhou et al. conducted a retrospective study on EJA patients who underwent radical surgery to find that it was the higher preoperative lymphocyte-monocyte ratio (LMR), not NLR or PLR, that independently predicts poor OS 35.

There were a few studies focusing on the association between absolute neutrophil (NE), lymphocyte (LY) or platelet (PLT) counts and EJC prognosis 26, 34, 36-38. However, only Fuchs et al. found that abnormally low blood levels of LY (HR = 1.31, 95% CI: 1.05 - 1.63, p = 0.0015) and high levels of NE (HR = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.17 - 1.99, p < 0.0001) were both candidates for predicting risk of EJC patients who underwent 4-month, first-line chemotherapy (platinum and/or fluoropyrimidine with or without an anthracycline) 37. When combining these three parameters, a systemic immune-inflammation score (SII) has emerged, calculated by using a formula (SII = NE×LY/PLT), first described in 2014 to explore its prognostic value in hepatocellular carcinoma 39. Jomrich et al. also introduced it for EJA and found that a higher SII contributes to poor OS and DFS in EJA patients who underwent esophagectomy with or without receiving neoadjuvant treatment 40.

With the occurrence of gastrointestinal bleeding, injury or aplastic anemia, RBCs will decrease, as well as hemoglobin (HGB). In a multicenter randomized trial including 248 EJC patients, an HGB lower than 110 g/l has been excluded from the baseline prognostic model, although it showed significantly poor quality of life 38. However, another study from China, conducted by Zhu et al., found that an HGB over 130 g/l might be a protective marker for EJA, but not in other gastric cancers 41, which was not in accordance with a previous study involving only stage I and II patients 42. Thus, a hierarchical analysis in different stages is provably needed. When turning to HGB- or RBC-related factors, few studies have been reported for EJC. Jomrich et al. evaluated the prognostic value of preoperative mean corpuscular volume (MCV), mean corpuscular hemoglobin (MCH), mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration (MCHC), and red blood cell distribution width (RDW) for patients with resectable EJC. For all patients, elevated MCV, MCH, and MCHC remained highly associated with reduced OS and DFS, and Cox regression analysis showed they could be independent prognostic factors in all EJC patients, but only MCV made sense in both OS and DFS in patients who were given neoadjuvant treatment 43. In consideration of the delicate relationship between MCH and alcohol consumption in ESCC 44, the potential mechanism between MCV and alcohol in EJC might be another focus in the future.

Biochemical and Coagulation Parameters

Biochemical detection is popular in clinical practice. For example, high levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and hypoalbuminemia usually indicate impairment of liver function. Hypoalbuminemia might result from reduced consumption. As mentioned before, the characteristic symptom of EJC is dysphagia, which will lead to a smaller diet and ultimately decreased albumin (ALB). The more serious the dysphagia, the lower the serum ALB. Thus, ALB might be a potential predictive marker for EJC. In fact, from Table 2, setting 35 g/l as the cutoff value, four studies all showed that the low preoperative albumin, the most popular research subject (Figure 1B), can be a potentially independent marker for predicting poor survival of EJC37, 45-47. As an acute-phase protein with shorter half-life (about 1.9 days) than ALB, pre-albumin, a 54 kDa protein, has become another focus of research. Han et al. and Zhang et al., from one research team, showed that a high level of pre-albumin could predict longer OS in EJA patients with Siewert type II and III who received gastrectomy 21, 48.

Table 2.

Blood-based biochemical and coagulation parameters in EJC prognosis

Variables Authors Number of EJC patients Cutoff Values Survival Types Hazard Ratio 95% Confidence Interval P-Value
ALB Bando H36 14 35 g/l OS - - <0.001
Cao HL45 156 35 g/l OS c1.907 1.058-3.438 0.032
Chau I38 248 median OS 0.686 0.597-0.790 a<0.0001
Custodio A20 155 LLN - - - -
Fuchs CS37 - - OS c1.33 1.07-1.65 0.0006
Han WX48 101 40 g/l OS 0.945 0.469-1.903 0.874
Jomrich G46 155 35 g/l OS 0.52 0.33-0.82 0.005
DFS 0.51 0.33-0.80 0.004
Larsen AC47 170 - OS - - b-
Noble F26 138 35 g/l OS - - 0.137
DFS 0.957 0.919-0.997 0.034
Tianxing G56 - 42 g/l OS - - b0.725
Zhang L21 355 40 g/l OS - - 0.061
Zhu Z41 239 40 g/l OS - - b0.946
Pre-ALB Han WX48 101 200 g/l OS 0.494 0.271-0.901 0.021
Zhang L21 355 180 g/l OS 0.428 0.310-0.592 0.000
BIL Custodio A20 155 ULN - - - -
ALP Chau I38 248 100 U/l OS 1.412 1.136-1.755 <0.0001
Custodio A20 155 ULN - - - -
Fuchs CS37 - OS 1.28 1.03-1.60 0.0030
LDH Bando H36 14 ULN OS - - a<0.001
Custodio A20 155 ULN - - - -
Fuchs CS37 - OS 1.31 1.05-1.63 0.0019
Larsen AC47 170 - OS 3.03 1.54-5.94 0.001
AST Fuchs CS37 - - OS 1.37 1.06-1.76 0.0014
Na Chau I38 248 median OS 0.721 0.621-0.837 a<0.0001
Fuchs CS37 - - OS c2.04 1.54-2.71 <0.0001
Ca Chau I38 248 median OS 1.005 0.856-1.178 b0.956
GPS Cui Y51 332 1 OS 2.32 1.69-3.20 <0.001
DFS 2.36 1.73-3.22 <0.001
2 OS 5.08 3.01-8.57 <0.001
DFS 3.01 1.71-5.29 <0.001
Kudou K49 59 1 OS 3.758 1.556-8.234 a0.0047
Jagadesham VP34 105 1 MS 1.58 0.62-4.06 0.337
mGPS Jomrich G46 155 1+2 OS 1.72 1.10-2.67 0.017
1+2 DFS 1.65 1.08-2.50 0.0195
Park JH52 163 1/2 OS 1.24 1.03-1.49 0.021
Urabe M59 87 1 OS 1.08 0.64-1.70 b0.093
2 OS 2.11 1.08-3.69 b0.093
1 DFS 1.07 0.65-1.66 0.081
2 DFS 0.49 0.25-0.89 0.081
CRP/ALB Kudou K49 59 0.1 OS 2.378 1.025-5.249 0.0439
Fib Cong X19 129 3.09 g/l OS 2.598 1.851-3.645 a<0.001
Jagadesham VP34 105 4.9 μmol/l MS - - d0.005
Tianxing G56 129 3.09 g/l OS 1.083 0.696-1.684 0.724

EJC: esophagogastric junction cancer; ALB: albumin; Pre-ALB: pre-albumin; BIL: bilirubin; ALP: alkaline phosphatase; LDH: lactate dehydrogenase; AST: aspartate aminotransferase; Na: sodium; Ca: calcium; GPS: Glasgow prognostic score; mGPS: modified GPS; Fib: fibrinogen; LLN: lower limit of normal; ULN: upper limit of normal; OS: overall survival; DFS: disease-free survival; MS: median survival

a statistical significance in univariate analysis; b no statistical significance in univariate analysis; c the HR of low level; d not included in the multivariate analysis

A team from the Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) conducted three randomized, controlled trials, and built a prognostic model using performance status, liver metastases, peritoneal metastasis, and alkaline phosphatase (ALP), to assess survival time in patients with locally advanced or metastatic EJA patients who underwent different chemotherapies 38. In this RMH prognostic system, an ALP over 100 U/l hinted at poor survival time and quality of life. It also correlated with a significantly reduced probability of tumor response to chemotherapy. Another study from the Yale Cancer Center recruited more than 1,000 patients with gastric cancer or EJC and collected 41 baseline factors, including biochemical and coagulation parameters 37. They found that high ALP, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and AST levels, and low albumin and sodium levels were independent markers for predicting poor OS. Meanwhile, another prognostic model was built based on 7 blood-based markers and other factors besides peritoneal metastases and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance scores. The patients listed in these two models were ones with advanced cancers who received chemotherapy. However, there are fewer models based on blood markers in early-stage patients or patients with resectable EJA.

C-reactive protein (CRP) is an acute protein that rises sharply in plasma when the body is infected or damaged due to any type of inflammation. After activating complement, it can strengthen phagocytosis by phagocytes to play a complementary role, and clears away pathogenic microorganisms that invade the body and tissue cells that are damaged, necrotic and apoptotic. Combining CRP and ALB, CRP/ALB and Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS) has been reported to assess EJC survival. Kudou et al. found that it was the CRP/ALB, but not GPS, that was strongly associated with poor OS in patients who underwent surgery for EJC 49. Patients with high T stages or N stages preferred to contain a larger CRP/ALB which indicated poor RFS and OS. Compared with GPS, patients with a normal CRP level (≤ 1.0 mg/dl) regardless of albumin were given a modified GPS (mGPS) of 050. Jomrich et al. thought that post-neoadjuvant therapy mGPS is highly associated with OS and DFS in patients suffering from neoadjuvantly-treated EJA (HR = 1.72, 95% CI: 1.10 - 2.67 for OS; HR: 1.65, 95% CI: 1.08 - 2.50 for DFS) 46. A research from China also determined its prognostic value in predicting OS and DFS in EJA patients with resection 51. Park et al. suggested that mGPS might be an independent marker for survival in patients with EJA (163 out of 203 participants, including gastric cancer) undergoing palliative self-expandable metallic stent insertion (HR = 1.24, 95% CI: 1.03 - 1.49) 52.

Combination of CBC and Biochemical or Coagulation Parameters

The controlling nutritional status (CONUT) score is calculated from the serum albumin, total cholesterol, and absolute lymphocyte count 53, and better predicts survival than NLR and GPS in gastric cancer. However, it might not be a significant independent prognostic marker in EJA patients after surgery 49. Due to the small amount of research, a further study concentrating on CONUT scores to evaluate the prognostic value of EJA is needed.

Fibrinogen is a protein involved in clotting and thrombosis, and synthesized by the liver 54. Hyperfibrinogenemia has been seen to correlate with cancer progression and poor survival in colon cancer 55. In limited EJC research, there has been little concern about fibrinogen alone. A novel scoring system, denoted F-NLR, has recently aroused some attention. Patients with both hyperfibrinogenemia (≥ 3.09 g/l) and high NLR (≥ 1.89) were given a score of 2, while ones with neither hyperfibrinogenemia nor high NLR were given a score of 0.

As shown in Table 3, both studies acquired the same results in which F-NLR could be an independent factor for predicting OS of EJA patients 19, 56. Cong et al. conducted a training-validation cohort study and found the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of F-NLR in predicting the survival of EJC was 0.717 (95% CI: 0.664 - 0.770), slightly higher than that of TNM staging (0.700; 95% CI: 0.646 - 0.754), although there was no statistical difference19. When stratified by pathological TNM staging, the OS of EJA patients with F-NLR 2 was poor compared with that of F-NLR 0 or 1 both in stages I - II and in stages III (all p < 0.001 in the combined set). In addition, Tianxing et al. found that F-NLR was associated with tumor size and TNM stage (both p < 0.01) 56.

Table 3.

Combination of hematologic, biochemical and coagulate parameters in EJC prognosis

Variables Authors Number of EJC Patients Cutoff Values Survival Types Hazard Ratio 95% Confidence Interval P-Value
CONUT score Kudou K49 59 3 OS 4.749 2.146-10.09 a0.0003
F-NLR Cong X19 129 1 OS 1.921 1.124-3.283 0.017
2 OS 2.764 1.559-4.900 0.001
Tianxing G56 129 - OS 1.730 1.173-2.551 0.006
PNI Han WX48 101 51 OS 0.751 0.372-1.518 0.426
Noble F26 138 47.50 OS - - 0.323
DFS 0.979 0.950-1.009 0.165
Urabe M59 112 con OS 0.62 0.47-0.82 <0.001
DFS 0.60 0.46-0.78 <0.001
Zhang L21 355 51.3 OS 1.192 0.828-1.715 0.345
AGR/PNI Wang Y60 215 1/2 OS 0.613 0.226-0.923 <0.001

EJC: esophagogastric junction cancer; CONUT score: controlling nutritional status score; F-NLR: combination of fibrinogen concentration and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio; PNI: prognostic nutritional index; AGR: albumin-to-globulin ratio; OS: overall survival; DFS: disease-free survival; con: continuous variable

a statistical significance in univariate analysis

First described by Pennsylvania researchers 57 and revised by Japanese researchers 58, the prognostic nutritional index (PNI) is another parameter containing CBC and biochemical indices. It can be calculated from the serum albumin concentration (g/l) plus five times the absolute lymphocyte counts (×109/l). It can mirror malnutrition status due to the impaired digestive function, such as dysphagia and loss of appetite. Four studies included PNI (Table 3) 21, 26, 48, 59, but only Urabe et al. was able to show that preoperative PNI is independently associated with OS and relapse-free survival (HR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.47 - 0.82, p < 0.001; HR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.46 - 0.78, p < 0.001, respectively) 59 in 1363 patients who underwent surgery with gastric cancer with a small sample size of 87 EJA patients. When stratifying PNI into four groups in which patients with PNI larger than 51.9 in the fourth quartile, the authors found that constituent ratios of PNI differed in different T stages and N stages. Thus, a definite relationship between PNI and EJA survival still remains to be shown. Wang et al. tried to combine the albumin-to-globulin ratio (AGR) and PNI to establish an innovative system to estimate its prognostic value in Siewert type III EJA, and found that AGR-PNI is associated with age, tumor size, NLR and PLR (all p < 0.05), serving as an independent predictor for OS of EJA patients60. Although there was no statistically significant relationship between AGR-PNI and pathological TNM stage (p = 0.607), patients with AGR-PNI 1 or 2 had better OS rates in stages I+II and III than that with AGR-PNI 3.

Tumor-Associated Circulating Materials

External and internal antigens stimulate our immune system to secrete antibodies 61. Cancer can express and release tumor-associated antigens into the circulating environment, so detection of their serum levels should assist in estimating the occurrence of malignancy, response to therapy and prognosis. Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) have been utilized for several decades as major serum tumor markers for gastrointestinal cancers. It is reported that elevated preoperative serum CEA and CA19-9 correlate with poor survival in pancreatic cancer 62. Tokunaga et al. tried to evaluate the prognostic value of CEA and CA19-9 in EJA 63. As a result, both them were found to be associated with depth of invasion and lymph node metastasis (all p < 0.05) and a high level of both could imply an advanced stage. However, in univariate and multivariate analysis, only CA19-9 served as a useful prognostic factor in patients with EJA (for CSS: HR = 3.89, 95% CI: 1.41 - 10.33; for OS: HR = 2.43, 95% CI: 1.03 - 5.35). Recently, a review highly commented the value of autoantibodies in the detection of esophageal cancer and EJA 64, but there lacks related studies using autoantibodies to discuss their accuracy in predicting survival time of EJA patients.

Tumorigenesis and metastasis usually partner with angiogenesis, which relies on both angiogenic and growth factors 65, 66. Using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, Park et al. initially detected the serum levels of several preoperative angiogenic factors, including vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A), fibroblast growth factor 2 (FGF2), epidermal growth factor (EGF) and hepatocyte growth factor (HGF), in patients with gastric cancer and EJA who underwent gastrectomy or esophagogastrectomy 67, and built an adjusted total value (ATV) uniting four factors. When these four factors were taken into consideration, multivariate analysis showed that only VEGF-A was a statistically significant independent prognostic factor for OS (p = 0.028) while ATV remained a powerful factor (p = 0.013) in another model taking into account margin status, tumor size, T category, N category and ATV. Bevacizumab is a monoclonal antibody that can inhibit VEGF, and is used for treating various metastatic cancers, including metastatic colorectal cancer and non-small-cell lung cancer. Thus, the potential of bevacizumab united with platinum in advanced EJA might be a good combination to improve survival.

Messenger RNA (mRNA) is transcribed from DNA and is translated into protein, evoking an opinion that they appear earlier than the tumor-associated proteins. Using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction, Qiao et al. suggested that enhanced cytokeratin 19 and CEA mRNA levels are related to lymph node metastasis. Increased pre-cytokeratin 19 and CEA mRNA levels were independent prognostic factors for OS in gastric cardia cancer patients receiving surgery 68. As noncoding 17- to 25-nucleotide-long RNA, microRNA has been seen as a new type of marker for numerous diseases, and plays vital roles in tumorigenesis, metastasis and prognosis 69. Yu et al. investigated the expression of microRNA and identified a five-microRNA signature, including hsa-let-7a, hsa-miR-221, hsa-miR-137, hsa-miR-372, and hsa-miR-182, as a novel independent prognostic factor in non-small-cell lung cancer patients 70. In the EJA field, Odenthal et al. showed, in 50 patients with local advanced EJA who underwent neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgical resection, that 122 microRNAs were differentially expressed between healthy volunteers and EJA participants 71. They indicated that high miR-302c and low miR-222 expression were significantly correlated with better OS. These two studies based on blood-based RNA verify the feasibility of using tumor markers in blood for predicting survival of EJA patients.

Circulating DNA or RNA methylation test is a research hotspot in the recent year in different cancers, such as colorectal cancer 72, hepatocellular carcinoma 73, breast cancer 74 and so on. When it came to EJC, Guo et al. detected the aberrant methylation status of long coding RNA LOC100130476 in peripheral white blood cells in three regions, different parts in exon or intron 75. Patients with region 1 (located in exon 1: from +245 to +413 bp) hypermethylation of LOC100130476 revealed significant poorer 5-year survival rates compared with those with region 1 unmethylation of the marker (P < 0.05). The Cox multivariate analysis showed that the methylation of region 1 might be an independent prognostic marker of gastric cardia adenocarcinoma.

Circulating tumor cells (CTCs), which can be derived from the primary tumor and enter into the circulation with the potential for metastasis, are another target of intense research in cancer, especially in advanced cancers. Among patients with metastatic EJA, Kubisch et al. isolated CTCs from peripheral blood of 62 patients (25 patients with EJA) and detected their mRNA levels 76. Results showed that the presence of CTCs was a predictor for OS and progression-free survival, and the mRNA transcripts were associated with tumor survival.

Conclusion and Perspectives

Prognosis of esophagogastric junction cancer is poor. Only the traditional TNM staging system is utilized to evaluate the prognosis and treatment decision. Novel markers are urgently needed for assistant. Among we reviewed here, NLR, a popular object of study, is widely seen as a potential prognostic predictive marker. When combined with fibrinogen, F-NLR, functioned as another prognostic marker, was verified by two research teams 19, 56. The limitation of small account and single center indicated the requirement of more study. When it turns to biochemical indices, albumin and LDH might act as meaningful markers in predicting survival time of EJC.

Epstein-Barr (EB) virus, a gamma-herpesvirus, is found to be related to several diseases, such as infectious mononucleosis 77, Burkitt's lymphoma 78 and nasopharyngeal carcinoma 65. EB virus also infect the gastric epithelial cell, might leading to gastric carcinoma, which takes a nine percent in all gastric cancers 79. Although Wang et al. thought that EB virus could be associated with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma80, most of other research hold the same view of no pertinence in esophageal carcinogenesis 81, 82. Genitsch et al. found a low positive detection of EB virus-encoded small RNAs in tumor samples of EJC patients 83. However, the detection in peripheral blood of EJC patients is absent. Thus, it is urgently needed to explore the association between circulating EB virus antigen, antibodies or RNA and EJC.

The purpose of this review is to illuminate recent work on the predictive value of blood-based markers for prognosis in EJC. If cancer-related RNAs, proteins and cells can be taken into consideration, the accuracy for determining EJC prognosis can be enhanced. The methylation of gene might be a novel and hotspot. Moreover, related research should be completed besides the concise mechanism which is needed for elucidating how they work on the development of EJC. Most of the enrolled studies focused on the pretreatment blood markers, but not in the post-treatment fields. With the characteristics of low-cost and minimally invasive techniques, after additional verification, blood-based markers might brighten the future of treatment options for EJC.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by grants from the Natural Science Foundation of China (grant numbers 81972801), the Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (grant numbers 2018A030307079, 2019A1515011873), the Innovative and Strong School Project of Guangdong (grant number 2018KTSCX068); and Grant for Key Disciplinary Project of Clinical Medicine under the Guangdong High-level University Development Program. And we thank Stanley Li for the proofread of this manuscript.

Abbreviations

EJC

esophagogastric junction cancer

EJA

esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma

BE

Barrett's esophagus

NLR

neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio

PLR

platelet-lymphocyte ratio

LMR

lymphocyte-monocyte ratio

SII

systemic immune-inflammation score

PLT

platelet

NE

neutrophil count

LY

lymphocyte count

WBC

white blood cell

HGB

hemoglobin

MCV

mean corpuscular volume

MCH

mean corpuscular hemoglobin

MCHC

mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration

RDW

red blood cell distribution width

HCT

hematocrit

OS

overall survival

DFS

disease-free survival

CSS

cancer-specific survival

TTP

time to progression

MS

median survival

ALB

albumin

Pre-ALB

pre-albumin

BIL

bilirubin

ALP

alkaline phosphatase

LDH

lactate dehydrogenase

AST

aspartate aminotransferase

Na

sodium

Ca

calcium

GPS

Glasgow prognostic score

mGPS

modified GPS

Fib

fibrinogen

LLN

lower limit of normal

ULN

upper limit of normal

CONUT score

controlling nutritional status score

F-NLR

combination of fibrinogen concentration and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio

PNI

prognostic nutritional index

AGR

albumin-to-globulin ratio

EB virus

Epstein-Barr virus

References

  • 1.Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018;68:394–424. doi: 10.3322/caac.21492. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Arnold M, Soerjomataram I, Ferlay J, Forman D. Global incidence of oesophageal cancer by histological subtype in 2012. Gut. 2015;64:381–7. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2014-308124. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Siewert JR, Stein HJ. Classification of adenocarcinoma of the oesophagogastric junction. Br J Surg. 1998;85:1457–9. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2168.1998.00940.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Enzinger PC, Mayer RJ. Esophageal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:2241–52. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra035010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.McColl KE, Going JJ. Aetiology and classification of adenocarcinoma of the gastro-oesophageal junction/cardia. Gut. 2010;59:282–4. doi: 10.1136/gut.2009.186825. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Sharma P. Clinical practice. Barrett's esophagus. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:2548–56. doi: 10.1056/NEJMcp0902173. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Chen W, Zheng R, Baade PD, Zhang S, Zeng H, Bray F. et al. Cancer statistics in China, 2015. CA Cancer J Clin. 2016;66:115–32. doi: 10.3322/caac.21338. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Saito H, Fukumoto Y, Osaki T, Fukuda K, Tatebe S, Tsujitani S. et al. Distinct recurrence pattern and outcome of adenocarcinoma of the gastric cardia in comparison with carcinoma of other regions of the stomach. World J Surg. 2006;30:1864–9. doi: 10.1007/s00268-005-0582-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Haga Y, Hato S, Ikenaga M, Yamamoto K, Tsuburaya A, Doi K. et al. Validation of an assessment tool: Estimation of Postoperative Overall Survival for Gastric Cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2018;44:515–23. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2018.01.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Fontana E, Smyth EC, Cunningham D. Esophagogastric Adenocarcinoma: Is More Chemotherapy Better? Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2016;17:21. doi: 10.1007/s11864-016-0395-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Rice TW, Gress DM, Patil DT, Hofstetter WL, Kelsen DP, Blackstone EH. Cancer of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction-Major changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67:304–17. doi: 10.3322/caac.21399. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Shaw A, Bradley MD, Elyan S, Kurian KM. Tumour biomarkers: diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive. BMJ. 2015;351:h3449. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h3449. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Candido J, Hagemann T. Cancer-related inflammation. J Clin Immunol. 2013;33(Suppl 1):S79–84. doi: 10.1007/s10875-012-9847-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Shaul ME, Fridlender ZG. Tumour-associated neutrophils in patients with cancer. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2019;16:601–20. doi: 10.1038/s41571-019-0222-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Lorente D, Mateo J, Templeton AJ, Zafeiriou Z, Bianchini D, Ferraldeschi R. et al. Baseline neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is associated with survival and response to treatment with second-line chemotherapy for advanced prostate cancer independent of baseline steroid use. Ann Oncol. 2015;26:750–5. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdu587. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Lalani AA, Xie W, Martini DJ, Steinharter JA, Norton CK, Krajewski KM. et al. Change in Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in response to immune checkpoint blockade for metastatic renal cell carcinoma. J Immunother Cancer. 2018;6:5. doi: 10.1186/s40425-018-0315-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Bartlett EK, Flynn JR, Panageas KS, Ferraro RA, Sta Cruz JM, Postow MA. et al. High neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is associated with treatment failure and death in patients who have melanoma treated with PD-1 inhibitor monotherapy. Cancer. 2020;126:76–85. doi: 10.1002/cncr.32506. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Sunakawa Y, Yang D, Cao S, Zhang W, Moran M, Astrow SH. et al. Immune-related Genes to Dominate Neutrophil-lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) Associated With Survival of Cetuximab Treatment in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. Clin Colorectal Cancer. 2018;17:e741–e9. doi: 10.1016/j.clcc.2018.08.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Cong X, Li S, Zhang Y, Zhu Z, Wang Y, Song S. et al. The combination of preoperative fibrinogen and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio is a predictive prognostic factor in esophagogastric junction and upper gastric cancer. J Cancer. 2019;10:5518–26. doi: 10.7150/jca.31162. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Custodio A, Carmona-Bayonas A, Jimenez-Fonseca P, Sanchez ML, Viudez A, Hernandez R. et al. Nomogram-based prediction of survival in patients with advanced oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma receiving first-line chemotherapy: a multicenter prospective study in the era of trastuzumab. Br J Cancer. 2017;116:1526–35. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2017.122. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Zhang L, Su Y, Chen Z, Wei Z, Han W, Xu A. The prognostic value of preoperative inflammation-based prognostic scores and nutritional status for overall survival in resected patients with nonmetastatic Siewert type II/III adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction. Medicine (Baltimore) 2017;96:e7647. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000007647. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Conway AM, Salih Z, Papaxoinis G, Fletcher K, Weaver J, Patrao A. et al. Significance of blood neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio for prognostic stratification of patients with gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma in the era of the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC8) staging. Med Oncol. 2017;34:116. doi: 10.1007/s12032-017-0976-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Yuan D, Zhu K, Li K, Yan R, Jia Y, Dang C. The preoperative neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio predicts recurrence and survival among patients undergoing R0 resections of adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction. J Surg Oncol. 2014;110:333–40. doi: 10.1002/jso.23651. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Wang SC, Chou JF, Strong VE, Brennan MF, Capanu M, Coit DG. Pretreatment Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio Independently Predicts Disease-specific Survival in Resectable Gastroesophageal Junction and Gastric Adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. 2016;263:292–7. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001189. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Grenader T, Waddell T, Peckitt C, Oates J, Starling N, Cunningham D. et al. Prognostic value of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in advanced oesophago-gastric cancer: exploratory analysis of the REAL-2 trial. Ann Oncol. 2016;27:687–92. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdw012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Noble F, Hopkins J, Curtis N, Kelly JJ, Bailey IS, Byrne JP. et al. The role of systemic inflammatory and nutritional blood-borne markers in predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and survival in oesophagogastric cancer. Med Oncol. 2013;30:596. doi: 10.1007/s12032-013-0596-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Zhang JW, Huang L, Xu AM. Preoperative monocyte-lymphocyte and neutrophil-lymphocyte but not platelet-lymphocyte ratios are predictive of clinical outcomes in resected patients with non-metastatic Siewert type II/III adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction: a prospective cohort study (the AMONP corhort) Oncotarget. 2017;8:57516–27. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.15497. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Ruf W. Tissue factor and cancer. Thromb Res. 2012;130(Suppl 1):S84–7. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2012.08.285. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Olsson AK, Cedervall J. The pro-inflammatory role of platelets in cancer. Platelets. 2018;29:569–73. doi: 10.1080/09537104.2018.1453059. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Dunn GP, Old LJ, Schreiber RD. The immunobiology of cancer immunosurveillance and immunoediting. Immunity. 2004;21:137–48. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2004.07.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Cannon NA, Meyer J, Iyengar P, Ahn C, Westover KD, Choy H. et al. Neutrophil-lymphocyte and platelet-lymphocyte ratios as prognostic factors after stereotactic radiation therapy for early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 2015;10:280–5. doi: 10.1097/JTO.0000000000000399. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Krenn-Pilko S, Langsenlehner U, Thurner EM, Stojakovic T, Pichler M, Gerger A. et al. The elevated preoperative platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio predicts poor prognosis in breast cancer patients. Br J Cancer. 2014;110:2524–30. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2014.163. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Messager M, Neofytou K, Chaudry MA, Allum WH. Prognostic impact of preoperative platelets to lymphocytes ratio (PLR) on survival for oesophageal and junctional carcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: A retrospective monocentric study on 153 patients. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2015;41:1316–23. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2015.06.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Jagadesham VP, Lagarde SM, Immanuel A, Griffin SM. Systemic inflammatory markers and outcome in patients with locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus and gastro-oesophageal junction. Br J Surg. 2017;104:401–7. doi: 10.1002/bjs.10425. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Zhou WJ, Wu J, Li XD, Wang Q, Ni XF, Jiang JT. et al. [Effect of preoperative monocyte-lymphocyte ratio on prognosis of patients with resectable esophagogastric junction cancer] Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi. 2017;39:178–83. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-3766.2017.03.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Bando H, Rubinstein L, Harris P, Yoshino T, Doi T, Ohtsu A. et al. Analysis of esophagogastric cancer patients enrolled in the National Cancer Institute Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program sponsored phase 1 trials. Gastric Cancer. 2017;20:481–8. doi: 10.1007/s10120-016-0629-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Fuchs CS, Muro K, Tomasek J, Van Cutsem E, Cho JY, Oh SC. et al. Prognostic Factor Analysis of Overall Survival in Gastric Cancer from Two Phase III Studies of Second-line Ramucirumab (REGARD and RAINBOW) Using Pooled Patient Data. J Gastric Cancer. 2017;17:132–44. doi: 10.5230/jgc.2017.17.e16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Chau I, Norman AR, Cunningham D, Waters JS, Oates J, Ross PJ. Multivariate prognostic factor analysis in locally advanced and metastatic esophago-gastric cancer-pooled analysis from three multicenter, randomized, controlled trials using individual patient data. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:2395–403. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2004.08.154. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Hu B, Yang XR, Xu Y, Sun YF, Sun C, Guo W. et al. Systemic immune-inflammation index predicts prognosis of patients after curative resection for hepatocellular carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20:6212–22. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-0442. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Jomrich G, Paireder M, Kristo I, Baierl A, Ilhan-Mutlu A, Preusser M. et al. High Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index is an Adverse Prognostic Factor for Patients With Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. 2019 doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003370. [Epub ahead of print] [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Zhu Z, Wang Y, Li F, Gao J, Han B, Wang R. et al. [Comparison of clinicopathological features and prognosis between adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction and adenocarcinoma of gastric antrum] Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2019;22:149–55. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Shen JG, Cheong JH, Hyung WJ, Kim J, Choi SH, Noh SH. Pretreatment anemia is associated with poorer survival in patients with stage I and II gastric cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2005;91:126–30. doi: 10.1002/jso.20272. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Jomrich G, Hollenstein M, John M, Ristl R, Paireder M, Kristo I. et al. High Mean Corpuscular Volume Predicts Poor Outcome for Patients With Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26:976–85. doi: 10.1245/s10434-019-07186-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Zheng YZ, Dai SQ, Li W, Cao X, Li Y, Zhang LJ. et al. Prognostic value of preoperative mean corpuscular volume in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol. 2013;19:2811–7. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i18.2811. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Cao HL, Jin SQ, Wang KB, Bai B. Prognostic factors influencing the survival of patients with carcinoma of the gastric cardia receiving preoperative interventional embolization chemotherapy. Oncotarget. 2017;8:79567–75. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.18571. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Jomrich G, Hollenstein M, John M, Baierl A, Paireder M, Kristo I. et al. The modified glasgow prognostic score is an independent prognostic indicator in neoadjuvantly treated adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction. Oncotarget. 2018;9:6968–76. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.24087. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Larsen AC, Hollander C, Duval L, Schonnemann K, Achiam M, Pfeiffer P. et al. A nationwide retrospective study of perioperative chemotherapy for gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma: tolerability, outcome, and prognostic factors. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:1540–7. doi: 10.1245/s10434-014-4127-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Han WX, Chen ZM, Wei ZJ, Xu AM. Preoperative pre-albumin predicts prognosis of patients after gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction. World J Surg Oncol. 2016;14:279. doi: 10.1186/s12957-016-1035-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Kudou K, Saeki H, Nakashima Y, Kamori T, Kawazoe T, Haruta Y. et al. C-reactive protein/albumin ratio is a poor prognostic factor of esophagogastric junction and upper gastric cancer. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019;34:355–63. doi: 10.1111/jgh.14442. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.McMillan DC. An inflammation-based prognostic score and its role in the nutrition-based management of patients with cancer. Proc Nutr Soc. 2008;67:257–62. doi: 10.1017/S0029665108007131. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Cui Y, Li J, Liu M, Shi Z, Fu Y, Cai L. et al. [Value of Glasgow prognostic score in patients with adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction] Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2016;19:54–7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Park JH, Woodley N, McMillan DC, Glen P. Palliative stenting for oesophagogastric cancer: tumour and host factors and prognosis. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2019;9:332–9. doi: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2017-001490. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Kuroda D, Sawayama H, Kurashige J, Iwatsuki M, Eto T, Tokunaga R. et al. Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) score is a prognostic marker for gastric cancer patients after curative resection. Gastric Cancer. 2018;21:204–12. doi: 10.1007/s10120-017-0744-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.de Moerloose P, Casini A, Neerman-Arbez M. Congenital fibrinogen disorders: an update. Semin Thromb Hemost. 2013;39:585–95. doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1349222. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Son HJ, Park JW, Chang HJ, Kim DY, Kim BC, Kim SY. et al. Preoperative plasma hyperfibrinogenemia is predictive of poor prognosis in patients with nonmetastatic colon cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:2908–13. doi: 10.1245/s10434-013-2968-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Tianxing G, Xiaojie P, Lihuan Z, Yangyun H. Combination of preoperative fibrinogen and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio is a predictive prognostic factor in ESCC and AEG systematic review. Biosci Rep. 2019. 39; doi: 10.1042/BSR20190480. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • 57.Buzby GP, Mullen JL, Matthews DC, Hobbs CL, Rosato EF. Prognostic nutritional index in gastrointestinal surgery. Am J Surg. 1980;139:160–7. doi: 10.1016/0002-9610(80)90246-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Onodera T, Goseki N, Kosaki G. [Prognostic nutritional index in gastrointestinal surgery of malnourished cancer patients] Nihon Geka Gakkai Zasshi. 1984;85:1001–5. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Urabe M, Yamashita H, Watanabe T, Seto Y. Comparison of Prognostic Abilities Among Preoperative Laboratory Data Indices in Patients with Resectable Gastric and Esophagogastric Junction Adenocarcinoma. World J Surg. 2018;42:185–94. doi: 10.1007/s00268-017-4146-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Wang Y, Zhu Z, Li C, Ma Y, You Q, Li Z. et al. Prognostic significance of preoperative albumin-to-globulin ratio and prognostic nutritional index combined score in Siewert type 3 adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction. Cancer Manag Res. 2019;11:7631–8. doi: 10.2147/CMAR.S191333. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Wang L, Gao J, Lan X, Zhao H, Shang X, Tian F. et al. Identification of combined T-cell and B-cell reactive Echinococcus granulosus 95 antigens for the potential development of a multi-epitope vaccine. Ann Transl Med. 2019;7:652. doi: 10.21037/atm.2019.10.87. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Wu L, Huang P, Wang F, Li D, Xie E, Zhang Y. et al. Relationship between serum CA19-9 and CEA levels and prognosis of pancreatic cancer. Ann Transl Med. 2015;3:328. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2305-5839.2015.11.17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Tokunaga R, Imamura Y, Nakamura K, Uchihara T, Ishimoto T, Nakagawa S. et al. Carbohydrate antigen 19-9 is a useful prognostic marker in esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma. Cancer Med. 2015;4:1659–66. doi: 10.1002/cam4.514. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Xu YW, Peng YH, Xu LY, Xie JJ, Li EM. Autoantibodies: Potential clinical applications in early detection of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma. World J Gastroenterol. 2019;25:5049–68. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v25.i34.5049. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Yang L, Liu L, Xu Z, Liao W, Feng D, Dong X. et al. EBV-LMP1 targeted DNAzyme enhances radiosensitivity by inhibiting tumor angiogenesis via the JNKs/HIF-1 pathway in nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Oncotarget. 2015;6:5804–17. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.3331. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Shen L, Zhou Q, Wang Y, Liao W, Chen Y, Xu Z. et al. Antiangiogenic and antitumoral effects mediated by a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 1 (VEGFR-1)-targeted DNAzyme. Mol Med. 2013;19:377–86. doi: 10.2119/molmed.2013.00090. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Park DJ, Yoon C, Thomas N, Ku GY, Janjigian YY, Kelsen DP. et al. Prognostic significance of targetable angiogenic and growth factors in patients undergoing resection for gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancers. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:1130–7. doi: 10.1245/s10434-013-3429-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Qiao YF, Chen CG, Yue J, Ma MQ, Ma Z, Yu ZT. Prognostic significance of preoperative and postoperative CK19 and CEA mRNA levels in peripheral blood of patients with gastric cardia cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2017;23:1424–33. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v23.i8.1424. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Iorio MV, Croce CM. MicroRNAs in cancer: small molecules with a huge impact. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5848–56. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.24.0317. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Yu SL, Chen HY, Chang GC, Chen CY, Chen HW, Singh S. et al. MicroRNA signature predicts survival and relapse in lung cancer. Cancer Cell. 2008;13:48–57. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2007.12.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Odenthal M, Hee J, Gockel I, Sisic L, Schmitz J, Stoecklein NH. et al. Serum microRNA profiles as prognostic/predictive markers in the multimodality therapy of locally advanced adenocarcinomas of the gastroesophageal junction. Int J Cancer. 2015;137:230–7. doi: 10.1002/ijc.29363. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Luo H, Zhao Q, Wei W, Zheng L, Yi S, Li G, Circulating tumor DNA methylation profiles enable early diagnosis, prognosis prediction, and screening for colorectal cancer. Sci Transl Med. 2020. 12; doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aax7533. [DOI] [PubMed]
  • 73.Xu RH, Wei W, Krawczyk M, Wang W, Luo H, Flagg K. et al. Circulating tumour DNA methylation markers for diagnosis and prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma. Nat Mater. 2017;16:1155–61. doi: 10.1038/nmat4997. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Visvanathan K, Fackler MS, Zhang Z, Lopez-Bujanda ZA, Jeter SC, Sokoll LJ. et al. Monitoring of Serum DNA Methylation as an Early Independent Marker of Response and Survival in Metastatic Breast Cancer: TBCRC 005 Prospective Biomarker Study. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:751–8. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.66.2080. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Guo W, Dong Z, Shi Y, Liu S, Liang J, Guo Y. et al. Methylation-mediated downregulation of long noncoding RNA LOC100130476 in gastric cardia adenocarcinoma. Clin Exp Metastasis. 2016;33:497–508. doi: 10.1007/s10585-016-9794-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Kubisch I, de Albuquerque A, Schuppan D, Kaul S, Schaich M, Stolzel U. Prognostic Role of a Multimarker Analysis of Circulating Tumor Cells in Advanced Gastric and Gastroesophageal Adenocarcinomas. Oncology. 2015;89:294–303. doi: 10.1159/000437373. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Luzuriaga K, Sullivan JL. Infectious mononucleosis. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1993–2000. doi: 10.1056/NEJMcp1001116. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Young LS, Rickinson AB. Epstein-Barr virus: 40 years on. Nat Rev Cancer. 2004;4:757–68. doi: 10.1038/nrc1452. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Farrell PJ. Epstein-Barr Virus and Cancer. Annu Rev Pathol. 2019;14:29–53. doi: 10.1146/annurev-pathmechdis-012418-013023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Wang LS, Chow KC, Wu YC, Li WY, Huang MH. Detection of Epstein-Barr virus in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in Taiwan. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;94:2834–9. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.1999.01425.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Wang J, Noffsinger A, Stemmermann G, Fenoglio-Preiser C. Esophageal squamous cell carcinomas arising in patients from a high-risk area of North China lack an association with Epstein-Barr virus. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1999;8:1111–4. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Awerkiew S, zur Hausen A, Baldus SE, Holscher AH, Sidorenko SI, Kutsev SI. et al. Presence of Epstein-Barr virus in esophageal cancer is restricted to tumor infiltrating lymphocytes. Med Microbiol Immunol. 2005;194:187–91. doi: 10.1007/s00430-004-0233-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Genitsch V, Novotny A, Seiler CA, Kroll D, Walch A, Langer R. Epstein-barr virus in gastro-esophageal adenocarcinomas - single center experiences in the context of current literature. Front Oncol. 2015;5:73. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2015.00073. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Cancer are provided here courtesy of Ivyspring International Publisher

RESOURCES