Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27344182›Full record

SynthesisOncotarget2016

Prognostic significance of preoperative prognostic nutritional index in colorectal cancer: results from a retrospective cohort study and a meta-analysis.

Yuchong Yang, Peng Gao, Xiaowan Chen, Yongxi Song, Jinxin Shi, Junhua Zhao, Jingxu Sun, Yingying Xu, Zhenning Wang

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Oncotarget, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

55 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Analysis of risk characteristics for early progression and late progression in locally advanced rectal cancer patients: a large population-based and validated study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  18. Review
  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.

Yuchong YangDepartment of Surgical Oncology and General Surgery, First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang City, PR China.
Peng GaoDepartment of Surgical Oncology and General Surgery, First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang City, PR China.
Xiaowan ChenDepartment of Surgical Oncology and General Surgery, First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang City, PR China.
Yongxi SongDepartment of Surgical Oncology and General Surgery, First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang City, PR China.
Jinxin ShiDepartment of Surgical Oncology and General Surgery, First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang City, PR China.
Junhua ZhaoDepartment of Surgical Oncology and General Surgery, First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang City, PR China.
Jingxu SunDepartment of Surgical Oncology and General Surgery, First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang City, PR China.
Yingying XuDepartment of Breast Surgery, First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang City, PR China.
Zhenning WangDepartment of Surgical Oncology and General Surgery, First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang City, PR China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The preoperative prognostic nutritional index (PNI) may forecast colorectal cancer (CRC) outcomes, but the evidence is not conclusive. Here, we retrospectively analyzed a cohort of patients from the Department of Surgical Oncology at the First Hospital of China Medical University (CMU-SO). We also conducted a meta-analysis of eleven cohort studies. Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) was used to determine the optimal PNI cut-off values for classifying prognosis in the patients from the CMU-SO. The result from CMU-SO and meta-analysis both confirmed that low PNI was significantly associated with a poor prognosis and advanced TNM stages. Among the patients from the CMU-SO, the optimal cut-off values were "41-45-58" (PNI < 41, 41 ≤ PNI < 45, 45 ≤ PNI < 58, PNI ≥ 58), which divided patients into 4 stages. The BIC value for TNM staging combined with the PNI was smaller than that of TNM staging alone (-325.76 vs. -310.80). In conclusion, low PNI was predictive of a poor prognosis and was associated with clinicopathological features in patients with CRC, and the 41-45-58 four-stage division may be suitable for determining prognosis. PNI may thus provide an additional index for use along with the current TNM staging system to determine more accurate CRC prognoses.

Indexed as

Nutritional StatusAgedBayes TheoremChinaColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateLymphatic MetastasisMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisNeoplasm StagingNutrition AssessmentPreoperative PeriodPrognosiscolorectal cancermeta-analysisprognosisprognostic nutritional indexTNM staging

Identifiers

PMID27344182
PMCPMC5295450

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.