Neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio and platelet/lymphocyte ratio in Behçet’s disease: which and when to use?
- 46 Downloads
Behçet’s disease (BD) is an uncommon autoimmune/autoinflammatory disease. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) were investigated in many diseases as a marker of inflammation. In this study, we investigated NLR and PLR in patients with BD as a marker of disease activity and its association with different clinical manifestations. The study included 23 BD patients; their mean age was (32.5 ± 6.76) and M:F ratio was 16:7. Complete blood picture was done for all patients. NLR and PLR were compared in both active and inactive BD patients and its relation with different clinical manifestations was assessed. NLR was higher in active BD patients than in inactive BD patients (P < 0.01). Although both NLR and PLR were correlated with Behçet’s Disease Current Activity Form (BDCAF), the correlation of NLR with BDCAF was much stronger than that of PLR. NLR was associated with some mucocutaneous lesions. Both NLR and PLR were associated with articular and GIT manifestations, but also NLR showed more significant results. In our studied patients, both NLR and PLR were not informative about any ongoing ocular activity (P > 0.05). Both ratios were not affected by the presence of neurologic deficits nor previous vascular events (P > 0.05). NLR was superior to PLR as an indicator of disease activity. NLR was closely related to skin manifestations while PLR was not. In our study, both were not considered reliable in representing ocular activity.
KeywordsBehçet’s disease (BD) Disease activity Neutrophil to lymphocyte (NLR)
Compliance with ethical standards
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 3.Janeway CA Jr, Travers P, Walport M et al (eds) (2001) Autoimmune responses are directed against selfantigens. Immunobiology: the immune system in health and disease, 5th edn. Garland Science, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 5.Alexander NI (2016) Reference values of neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-lymphocyte ratio and mean platelet volume in healthy adults in north Central Nigeria. J Blood Lymph 6:143Google Scholar
- 7.Yuksel M, Yildiz A, Oylumlu M, Turkcu FM, Bilik MZ, Ekinci A, Elbey B, Tekbas E, Alan S (2016) Novel markers of endothelial dysfunction and inflammation in Behçet’s disease patients with ocular involvement: epicardial fat thickness, carotid intima media thickness, serum ADMA level, and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio. Clin Rheumatol 35(3):701–708CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 13.Balta S, Balta I, Ӧztürk C et al (2014) Neutrophil lymphocyte ratio in patients with Behçet’s disease and its association with carotid intimaemedia thickness. Am J Cardiol 113:7e11Google Scholar
- 14.Ozturk C, Balta S, Balta I, Demirkol S, Celik T, Turker T, Iyisoy A, Eksioglu M (2015) Neutrophil lymphocyte ratio and carotid-intima media thickness in patients with Behçet disease without cardiovascular involvement. Angiology 66:291e6Google Scholar
- 15.Alan S, Tuna S, Türkoğlu EB (2015) The relation of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, and mean platelet volume with the presence and severity of Behçet’s syndrome. Kaohsiung J Med Sci 31:626e631Google Scholar
- 17.Erden F, Karagoz H, Avci A et al (2017) Which one is best? Platelet/lymphocyte ratio, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio or both in determining deep venous thrombosis in Behcet’s disease? Biomed Res 28(12):5304–5309Google Scholar
- 19.Neves FD, Caldas CAM, Medeiros DMD et al (2009) Cross-cultural adaptation of simplified version (s) of Behçet's Disease Current Activity Form (BDCAF) and comparison between two different instruments with Brazilian versions for evaluating Behçet's Disease Activity: BR-BDCAF and BR-BDCAF (s). Rev Bras Reumatol 49(1):20–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar