Prognostic value of platelet count in XXXX .

@entity1 @entity706 @entity146 @entity882 @entity1259 @entity786 @entity1892 @entity1891 @entity617
BACKGROUND: Besides International Prognostic Index, many parameters have proven prognostic significance in @entity146 . However, the most appropriate system of risk stratification in @entity1892 ( @entity1892 ) is not yet clear. In this study, we attempt to clarify the prognostic value of platelet count at the onset of @entity706 . MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 2000 and December 2009, 100 @entity1 with @entity1892 receiving R-CEOP (rituximab, @entity786 , @entity1259 , @entity1891 , and @entity617 ) in a single institution were enrolled. @entity1 characteristics and survival outcomes were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: Before front-line treatment, 17 @entity1 with @entity882 (< 150   10(9)/L) and 83 @entity1 without @entity882 were enrolled. @entity882 @entity1 initially presented with more B symptoms (P = .040), more bone marrow involvement (P = .001), later staging (P = .001), and higher International Prognostic Index (P < .001). @entity882 was shown to be an independently poor prognostic factor in the multivariate analysis of overall survival (hazard ratio [HR], 3.405; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.431-8.101; P = .006) and progression-free survival (HR, 4.299; 95% CI, 1.786-10.343; P = .001). CONCLUSION: Platelet count at diagnosis is a simple but useful indicator for predicting survival outcomes of @entity1892 . Although the mechanisms of @entity882 may be complex in @entity706 , further investigations are warranted to illustrate the predictive merit.
