Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26491346›Full record

ArticleOncoTargets and therapy2015

Prognostic role of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio in lung cancers: a meta-analysis including 7,054 patients.

Qing-Tao Zhao, Yong Yang, Shun Xu, Xiao-Peng Zhang, Hui-En Wang, Hua Zhang, Zhi-Kang Wang, Zheng Yuan, Guo-Chen Duan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in OncoTargets and therapy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Qing-Tao ZhaoDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, People's Republic of China.
Yong YangDepartment of General Surgery, Sujiatun Central Hospital, China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, People's Republic of China.
Shun XuDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, People's Republic of China.
Xiao-Peng ZhangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, People's Republic of China.
Hui-En WangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, People's Republic of China.
Hua ZhangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, People's Republic of China.
Zhi-Kang WangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, People's Republic of China.
Zheng YuanDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, People's Republic of China.
Guo-Chen DuanDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Hebei General Hospital, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, People's Republic of China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNeutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has recently been reported to be a poor prognostic indicator in lung cancer. However, the prognostic value of the NLR in patients with lung cancer still remains controversial. We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the prognostic value of NLR in patients with lung cancer.

methodsWe performed a comprehensive literature search in PubMed, Ovid, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases in May 2015. Studies were assessed for quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

resultsTwenty-two studies with a total of 7,054 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The meta-analysis was performed to generate combined hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Our analysis results indicated that high NLR predicted poorer OS (HR, 1.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.33-1.71; P<0.001) and PFS (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.07-1.67; P=0.012) in patients with lung cancer. High NLR was also associated with poor OS in lung cancer treated by surgical resection (HR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.26-1.99; P<0.001) and chemotherapy (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.08-1.22; P<0.001). In addition, NLR cut-off value =5 (HR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.16-2.12; P=0.003) and NLR cut-off value <5 (HR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.28-1.69; P<0.001).

conclusionThis meta-analysis result suggested that NLR should have significant predictive ability for estimating OS and PFS in patients with lung cancer and may be as a significant biomarker in the prognosis of lung cancer.

Indexed as

lung cancermeta-analysisNLRprognosis

Identifiers

PMID26491346
PMCPMC4599071

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.