Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29299172›Full record

ArticleOncotarget2017

Prognostic value of lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio among Asian lung cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Wen Li, Guangzhi Ma, Qiang Wu, Yunfu Deng, Ya Liu, Jing Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  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

6 authors.

Wen Li *Department of Thyroid and Breast Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P.R. China.
Guangzhi Ma *Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P.R. China.
Qiang Wu *Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P.R. China.
Yunfu DengCancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P.R. China.
Ya LiuDepartment of Thyroid and Breast Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P.R. China.
Jing WangDepartment of Thyroid and Breast Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P.R. China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeNumerous studies have reported the prognostic significance of lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) in malignancies, but its prognostic value among lung cancer remains controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to explore the prognostic significance of LMR in lung cancer patients.

resultsEight studies including 3954 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Pooled results indicated that low LMR was significantly associated with poorer progression-free survival (hazard ratio (HR): 1.431, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.294-1.582, MATERIALS AND

methodsIdentified literatures were extracted and retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases; All eligible studies focused on the association between LMR and the prognosis of lung cancer.

conclusionsLow LMR is associated with poor outcomes among lung cancer patients. Further studies are needed to discuss the correlation between LMR and lung cancer prognosis.

Indexed as

lung cancerlymphocyte to monocyte ratio (LMR)meta-analysisprognosis

Identifiers

PMID29299172
PMCPMC5746407

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.