Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27686880›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2017

Combination of preoperative NLR, PLR and CEA could increase the diagnostic efficacy for I-III stage CRC.

Hong-Xin Peng, Lin Yang, Bang-Shun He, Yu-Qin Pan, Hou-Qun Ying, Hui-Ling Sun, Kang Lin, Xiu-Xiu Hu, Tao Xu, Shu-Kui Wang

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

42 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Hong-Xin PengMedical School of Southeast University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Lin YangMedical School of Southeast University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Bang-Shun HeCentral Laboratory, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Yu-Qin PanCentral Laboratory, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Hou-Qun YingDepartment of Laboratory, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, Jiangxi, China.
Hui-Ling SunCentral Laboratory, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Kang LinCentral Laboratory, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Xiu-Xiu HuMedical School of Southeast University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Tao XuCentral Laboratory, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Shu-Kui WangMedical School of Southeast University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Nanjing Medical University · CNSoutheast University · CNNanchang University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInflammation plays an important role in the development and progression of CRC. The members of inflammatory biomarkers, preoperative NLR and PLR, have been proved by numerous studies to be promising prognostic biomarkers for CRC. However, the diagnostic value of the two biomarkers in CRC remains unknown, and no study reported the combined diagnostic efficacy of NLR, PLR and CEA.

methodsFive hundred and fifty-nine patients with I-III stage CRC undergoing surgical resection and 559 gender- and age-matched healthy controls were enrolled in this retrospective study. NLR and PLR were calculated from preoperative peripheral blood cell count detected using white blood cell five classification by Sysmex XT-1800i Automated Hematology System and serum CEA were measured by electrochemiluminescence by ELECSYS 2010. The diagnostic performance of NLR, PLR and CEA for CRC was evaluated by ROC curve.

resultsLevels of NLR and PLR in the cases were significantly higher than them in the healthy controls. ROC curves comparison analyses showed that the diagnostic efficacy of NLR (AUC=.755, 95%CI=.728-.780) alone for CRC was significantly higher than PLR (AUC=.723, 95%CI=.696-.749, P=.037) and CEA (AUC=.690, 95%CI=.662-.717, P=.002) alone. In addition, the diagnostic efficacy of the combination of NLR, PLR and CEA(AUC=.831, 95%CI=.807-.852)for CRC was not only significantly higher than NLR alone but also higher than any combinations of the two of these three biomarkers (P<.05). Moreover, the NLR and PLR in the patients with TNM stage I/II was higher than that in the healthy controls, and patients with stage III had a higher NLR and PLR than those with stage I/II, but no significant difference was observed.

conclusionOur study indicated that preoperative NLR could be a CRC diagnostic biomarker, even for early stage CRC, and the combination of NLR, PLR and CEA could significantly improve the diagnostic efficacy.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overArea Under CurveBiomarkers, TumorBlood PlateletsCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansLeukocyte CountLymphocytesMaleMiddle AgedNeutrophilsPlatelet CountBiomarkers, Tumorcolorectal cancerdiagnosisneutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratioplatelet-to-lymphocyte ratio

Identifiers

PMID27686880
PMCPMC6816914
OpenAlexW2526460917

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.