Background: The neutrophil-lymphocyte-ratio, platelet-lymphocyte-ratio, and monocyte-lymphocyte-ratio have been explored as a simple, inexpensive, and effective method for cancer prognosis. However, there are no studies that have investigated the comparative utility of these markers, in multiple cancers. Methods: The preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines were used to design this meta-analysis protocol. The final study will also be conducted under the PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. The core bibliographic database search will be carried out by 2 reviewers working individually, with each conducting an initial screening based on titles and abstracts. The shortlisted articles will be selected for review and quantitative analysis, based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Study characteristics, relevant clinicopathological characteristics, and statistical data required for meta-analysis (hazard ratios [HRs] and 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) will be extracted and compiled into a MS Excel datasheet. Meta-analysis will be performed, using a random-effects model, and the results (pooled HR and 95% CI) will be presented in the form of a forest plot. Publication bias will also be assessed by use of Egger bias indicator test and funnel plot symmetry. If statistical data from included studies is insufficient, a qualitative literature review will be pursued. PROSPERO registration: PROSPERO CRD42019121008.

Inflammation plays a major role in cancer development and progression and has the potential to be used as a prognostic marker in cancer. Previous studies have attempted to evaluate Platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio (NLR) or monocyte–lymphocyte ratio (MLR) as indicators of inflammation/prognostic markers in cancer, but there is no common consensus on their application in clinical practice. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to (a) assess the prognostic efficacy of all three prognostic markers in comparison to each other and (b) investigate the prognostic potential of these three markers in HNC. The study followed PRISMA guidelines, with the literature being collated from multiple bibliographic databases. Preliminary and secondary screening were carried out using stringent inclusion/exclusion criteria. Meta-analysis was carried out on selected studies using CMA software and HR as the pooled effect size metric. A total of 49 studies were included in the study. The pooled HR values of PLR, NLR and MLR indicated that they were significantly correlated with poorer OS. The pooled effect estimates for PLR, NLR and MLR were 1.461 (95% CI 1.329–1.674), 1.639 (95% CI 1.429–1.880) and 1.002 (95% CI 0.720–1.396), respectively. Significant between-study heterogeneity was observed in the meta-analysis of all three. The results of this study suggest that PLR, NLR and MLR ratios can be powerful prognostic markers in head and neck cancers that can guide treatment. Further evidence from large-scale clinical studies on patient cohorts are required before they can be incorporated as a part of the clinical method. PROSPERO Registration ID: CRD42019121008

Post-traumatic Stress Disorder and Post-traumatic Growth in Breast Cancer Patients - a Systematic Review Breast cancer;PTSD;PTG;psychological status;quality of life;psychological distress; Breast cancer (BC) is potentially a traumatic stressor which may be associated with negative outcomes, such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or positive changes, such as post-traumatic growth (PTG). This study aims to identify the core issues of BC related PTSD, PTG and psychological distress by interrogating the literature in BC survivors. We have also highlighted issues related to the assessment, diagnosis and clinical management of PTSD and PTG. The authors systematically reviewed studies published from 1985 to 2014 pertaining to PTSD, psychological distress and PTG in BC survivors with particular attention paid to incidence rates and causative factors. Multiple studies intimated that women with BC have evidence of PTSD at the initial stages of diagnosis, whereas PTG develops once patients undergo treatment. Early diagnosis and treatment of PTSD/PTG is paramount from literature review but the previously mentioned relationship between PTSD and PTG in BC patients could not be verified. It is evident from the literature that a small percentage of BC patients experience PTSD, while the majority experience PTG after BC diagnosis and treatment. Future research should include prospective studies focusing on high-risk patients, causative factors and the development of psychological interventions.