www.impactjournals.com/oncotarget/
Oncotarget, 2017, Vol. 8, (No. 25), pp: 40724-40731 Research Paper
Prognostic significance of the red blood cell distribution width in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients Shujuan Zhou1, Fang Fang1, Huiyao Chen1, Wei Zhang1, Yang Chen1, Yifen Shi1, Zhouyi Zheng2, Yongyong Ma1, Liyuan Tang1, Jianhua Feng1, Yu Zhang1, Lan Sun1, Yi Chen1, Bin Liang1, Kang Yu1 and Songfu Jiang1 1
Department of Hematology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, P.R. China
2
Department of Hematology and Oncology, Traditional Chinese Medical Hospital of Zhuji, Shaoxing, Zhejiang, P.R. China
Correspondence to: Songfu Jiang, email: [email protected] Kang Yu, email: [email protected] Keywords: diffuse large B cell lymphoma, red blood cell distribution width, prognosis, survival Received: November 30, 2016 Accepted: March 09, 2017 Published: March 25, 2017 Copyright: Zhou et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 3.0 (CC BY 3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
ABSTRACT This study examined the prognostic value of the baseline red blood cell distribution width (RDW) in diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients. The associations between RDW and clinical characteristics were assessed in 161 DLBCL patients from 2005 to 2016. The log-rank test, univariate analysis, and Cox regression analysis were used to evaluate the relationship between RDW and survival. A RDW of 14.1% was considered to be the optimal cut-off value for predicting prognosis. A high RDW was associated with more frequent B symptoms (P=0.001), a higher International Prognostic Index score (P=0.032), more extranodal sites of disease (P=0.035), and significantly lower Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (P=0.031). The log-rank test demonstrated that patients with a high RDW had a shorter overall survival (OS) (2-year OS rate, 53.6% vs. 83.6%, P
Oncotarget, 2017, Vol. 8, (No. 25), pp: 40724-40731 Research Paper
Prognostic significance of the red blood cell distribution width in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients Shujuan Zhou1, Fang Fang1, Huiyao Chen1, Wei Zhang1, Yang Chen1, Yifen Shi1, Zhouyi Zheng2, Yongyong Ma1, Liyuan Tang1, Jianhua Feng1, Yu Zhang1, Lan Sun1, Yi Chen1, Bin Liang1, Kang Yu1 and Songfu Jiang1 1
Department of Hematology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, P.R. China
2
Department of Hematology and Oncology, Traditional Chinese Medical Hospital of Zhuji, Shaoxing, Zhejiang, P.R. China
Correspondence to: Songfu Jiang, email: [email protected] Kang Yu, email: [email protected] Keywords: diffuse large B cell lymphoma, red blood cell distribution width, prognosis, survival Received: November 30, 2016 Accepted: March 09, 2017 Published: March 25, 2017 Copyright: Zhou et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 3.0 (CC BY 3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
ABSTRACT This study examined the prognostic value of the baseline red blood cell distribution width (RDW) in diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients. The associations between RDW and clinical characteristics were assessed in 161 DLBCL patients from 2005 to 2016. The log-rank test, univariate analysis, and Cox regression analysis were used to evaluate the relationship between RDW and survival. A RDW of 14.1% was considered to be the optimal cut-off value for predicting prognosis. A high RDW was associated with more frequent B symptoms (P=0.001), a higher International Prognostic Index score (P=0.032), more extranodal sites of disease (P=0.035), and significantly lower Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (P=0.031). The log-rank test demonstrated that patients with a high RDW had a shorter overall survival (OS) (2-year OS rate, 53.6% vs. 83.6%, P
