4.5 Review

Poor prognostic role of the pretreatment platelet counts in colorectal cancer A meta-analysis

Journal

MEDICINE
Volume 97, Issue 23, Pages -

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000010831

Keywords

colorectal cancer; meta-analysis; platelet count; survival

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Recently, a wide variety of studies have suggested that elevated platelet counts are associated with survival in patients with colorectal cancer. On one hand several studies suggest a negative connection in colorectal cancer patients with pre-operative thrombocytosis, on the other hand other studies contradicts this. However, it remains unknown whether elevated platelet counts are associated with survival in colorectal cancer patients. We therefore conducted this meta-analysis to evaluate the prognostic role of platelet counts in colorectal cancer. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched from their inception to October 15, 2016 to identify relevant studies that have explored the prognostic role of platelet counts in colorectal cancer. Studies that examined the association between platelet counts and prognoses in colorectal cancer and that provided a hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for overall survival (OS) and/or disease-free survival (DFS) were included. Results: This meta-analysis included 9 retrospective cohort studies involving 3413 patients with colorectal cancer. OS was shorter in patients with elevated platelet counts than in patients with normal counts (HR 2.11, 95% CI: 1.68-2.65). For DFS, an elevated platelet count was also a poor predictor (HR 2.51, 95% CI: 1.84-3.43). Conclusion: In this meta-analysis, we suggest that an elevated platelet count is a negative predictor of survival in both primary colorectal cancer and resectable colorectal liver metastases.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available