Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30636896›Full record

ArticleCancer management and research2019

Prognostic value of the Glasgow prognostic score in colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of 9,839 patients.

Xin Lu, Wanying Guo, Wei Xu, Xuelei Zhang, Zhijie Shi, Leizhen Zheng, Wenzhao Zhao

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer management and research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing 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

52 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. Review
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
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

7 authors.

Xin LuDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital and College of Clinical Medicine of Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang 471003, China, zhaowenzhao123@foxmail.com.
Wanying GuoDepartment of Breast Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital and College of Clinical Medicine of Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang 471003, China.
Wei XuDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital and College of Clinical Medicine of Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang 471003, China, zhaowenzhao123@foxmail.com.
Xuelei ZhangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital and College of Clinical Medicine of Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang 471003, China, zhaowenzhao123@foxmail.com.
Zhijie ShiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital and College of Clinical Medicine of Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang 471003, China, zhaowenzhao123@foxmail.com.
Leizhen ZhengDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital and College of Clinical Medicine of Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang 471003, China, zhaowenzhao123@foxmail.com.
Wenzhao ZhaoDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital and College of Clinical Medicine of Henan University of Science and Technology, Luoyang 471003, China, zhaowenzhao123@foxmail.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the value of the Glasgow prognostic score (GPS) or modified Glasgow prognostic score (mGPS) in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC).

methodsA comprehensive medical literature search was performed using the online databases PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. After extracting basic characteristics and prognostic data from the included studies, overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were pooled as primary outcomes. Subgroup analyses were performed according to therapeutic strategies, models, cutoff values, regions, tumor, node, metastasis stages, sample size, and ages.

resultsForty-three independent cohorts from 41 studies with 9,839 CRC patients were included in the present study. Correlation between GPS or mGPS and OS was analyzed in 32 cohorts of 7,714 patients, and 23 independent cohorts of 5,375 patients focused on the correlation between GPS or mGPS and CSS. The overall outcomes showed that patients with elevated GPS or mGPS were associated with poor OS (HR: 2.20, 95% CI: 1.88-2.57,

conclusionGPS or mGPS is an accurate prognostic predictor in patients with CRC. Patients with elevated pretreatment GPS or mGPS have a poor prognosis. Subgroup analyses confirmed the overall outcomes. Pretreatment GPS is a useful biomarker in the management of CRC.

Indexed as

colorectal cancerGlasgow prognostic scoremeta-analysismodified Glasgow prognostic scoresystematic review

Identifiers

PMID30636896
PMCPMC6307678

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.