Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31683460›Full record

ArticleCancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers2020

Evaluating prognostic utility of preoperative Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio and hsa-let-7g/c up-regulation in patients with urinary bladder cancer.

Nouha Setti Boubaker, Aymone Gurtner, Nesrine Trabelsi, Isabella Manni, Rahma Said, Haroun Ayed, Meriem Ksentini, Omar Karray, Ahmed Saadi, Mohamed Ali Essid and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

15 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Nouha Setti BoubakerLaboratory of Proteins Engineering and Bioactive Molecules, INSAT, University of Tunis Carthage, Tunis, Tunisia.
Aymone GurtnerUOSD SAFU, Department of Research, Diagnosis and Innovative Technologies, IRCCS-Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Nesrine TrabelsiLaboratory of Proteins Engineering and Bioactive Molecules, INSAT, University of Tunis Carthage, Tunis, Tunisia.
Isabella ManniUOSD SAFU, Department of Research, Diagnosis and Innovative Technologies, IRCCS-Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Rahma SaidLaboratory of Proteins Engineering and Bioactive Molecules, INSAT, University of Tunis Carthage, Tunis, Tunisia.
Haroun AyedLaboratory of Proteins Engineering and Bioactive Molecules, INSAT, University of Tunis Carthage, Tunis, Tunisia.
Meriem KsentiniPathology Department, Charles Nicolle Hospital, Tunis, Tunisia.
Omar KarrayUrology Department, Charles Nicolle Hospital, Tunis, Tunisia.
Ahmed SaadiLaboratory of Proteins Engineering and Bioactive Molecules, INSAT, University of Tunis Carthage, Tunis, Tunisia.
Mohamed Ali EssidUrology Department, Charles Nicolle Hospital, Tunis, Tunisia.
Ahlem BlelPathology Department, Charles Nicolle Hospital, Tunis, Tunisia.
Soumaya RammehPathology Department, Charles Nicolle Hospital, Tunis, Tunisia.
Mohamed ChebilUrology Department, Charles Nicolle Hospital, Tunis, Tunisia.
Giulia PiaggioUOSD SAFU, Department of Research, Diagnosis and Innovative Technologies, IRCCS-Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Rome, Italy.
Slah OuerhaniLaboratory of Proteins Engineering and Bioactive Molecules, INSAT, University of Tunis Carthage, Tunis, Tunisia.
Hôpital Charles-Nicolle · TNUniversity of Carthage · TNNational Institute of Applied Science and Technology · TN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStratification and risk-evaluation of bladder cancer (BCa) patients are far-reached issues, especially for those with non muscle invasive disease. Thus, setting-up biomarkers, especially after resection of the primary tumor, is crucial. Specifically, Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio NLR and let-7 deregulation which have been preliminarily but not consistently described to be associated to unfavorable prognosis.

objectiveTo explore the clinical value of pre-treatment Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR), let-7c and let-7g's deregulation.

methodsData were extracted from ninety BCa samples. Pre-treatment NLR was estimated as the absolute neutrophil count divided by the absolute lymphocyte count. Expression patterns of let-7c and let-7g were assessed by qRT-PCR. Correlation with clinical characteristics was performed by descriptive statistics.

resultsBoth let-7 miRs were upregulated. Interestingly, let-7g was associated to pathological stage (p= 0.001) and tumor multiplicity (p= 0.003). NLR was associated to histological grade (p= 0.005) and clinical stage (p= 0.006). They were both associated to more aggressive phenotype and their worth as potential stratification biomarkers was confirmed by ROC curve.

conclusionsOur data demonstrated the potential clinical value of all markers, especially pretreatment NLR and let-7g. Further studies are recommended to confirm their utility in improving the clinical decision-making regarding treatment and follow-up scheduling.

Indexed as

PrognosisAgedBiomarkers, TumorBlood Cell CountDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleGene Expression Regulation, NeoplasticHumansLymphocytesMaleMicroRNAsNeutrophilsPreoperative PeriodUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorMicroRNAsmirnlet7 microRNA, humanbiomarkerslet-7neoplasmsNLRstratificationUrinary bladder

Identifiers

PMID31683460
PMCPMC12662266
OpenAlexW2982458142

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.