English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Objective  Prognostic nutritional index (PNI), calculated as serum albumin (ALB) (g/L) + 5 × total lymphocyte count (10 9 /L), is initially used to evaluate nutritional status in patients undergoing surgery and may evaluate the therapeutic effects and predict the survival of various solid tumors. The present study aimed to evaluate the potential prognostic significance of PNI in breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT).    Methods  A total of 785 breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy were enrolled in this retrospective study. The optimal cutoff value of PNI by receiver operating characteristic curve stratified patients into a low-PNI group (<51) and a high PNI group (≥51). The associations between breast cancer and clinicopathological variables by PNI were determined by chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test. Kaplan–Meier plots and log-rank test were used to evaluate the clinical outcomes of disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). The prognostic value of PNI was analyzed by univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression models. The toxicity of NACT was accessed by the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC).    Results  The results indicated that PNI had prognostic significance by an optimal cutoff value of 51 on DFS and OS in univariate and multivariate Cox regression survival analyses. Breast cancer patients with a high PNI value had longer DFS and OS than those with a low PNI value [47.64  vs . 36.60 months,  P  < 0.0001, hazard ratio (HR) = 0.264, 95%CI = 0.160–0.435; 73.61  vs . 64.97 months,  P  < 0.0001, HR = 0.319, 95%CI = 0.207–0.491, respectively]. Furthermore, the results indicated that patients with high PNI had longer DFS and OS than those with low PNI in early stage and advanced breast cancer, especially in advanced breast cancer. The mean DFS and OS times for breast cancer patients with high PNI by the log-rank test were longer than in those with low PNI in different molecular subtypes. Moreover, the mean DFS and OS times in patients with high PNI by the log-rank test were longer than in those patients with low PNI without or with lymph vessel invasion. The common toxicities after neoadjuvant chemotherapy were hematologic and gastrointestinal reaction, and the PNI had no significance on the toxicities of all enrolled patients, except in anemia, leukopenia, and myelosuppression.    Conclusion  Pretreatment PNI with the advantages of being convenient, noninvasive, and reproducible was a useful prognostic indicator for breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy and is a promising biomarker for breast cancer on treatment strategy decisions.

Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI) in Patients With Breast Cancer Treated With Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy as a Useful Prognostic Indicator