Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31938023›Full record

ArticleCancer cell international2020

Prognostic role of pretreatment blood lymphocyte count in patients with solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jiawen Zhao, Weijia Huang, Yongxian Wu, Yihuan Luo, Bo Wu, Jiwen Cheng, Junqiang Chen, Deyun Liu, Chengyang Li

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer cell international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
66citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

66 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 106 citations in OpenAlex.

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

6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jiawen Zhao *1Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, 6 Shuangyong Road, Nanning, 530021 Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region China.
Weijia Huang *2Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, 6 Shuangyong Road, Nanning, 530021 Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region China.
Yongxian Wu *1Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, 6 Shuangyong Road, Nanning, 530021 Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region China.
Yihuan Luo2Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, 6 Shuangyong Road, Nanning, 530021 Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region China.
Bo Wu1Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, 6 Shuangyong Road, Nanning, 530021 Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region China.
Jiwen Cheng1Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, 6 Shuangyong Road, Nanning, 530021 Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region China.
Junqiang Chen2Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, 6 Shuangyong Road, Nanning, 530021 Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region China.
Deyun Liu1Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, 6 Shuangyong Road, Nanning, 530021 Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region China.
Chengyang Li1Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, 6 Shuangyong Road, Nanning, 530021 Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region China.
First Affiliated Hospital of GuangXi Medical University · CNGuangxi Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo evaluate the prognostic value of pretreatment lymphocyte counts with respect to clinical outcomes in patients with solid tumors.

methodsSystematic literature search of electronic databases (Pubmed, Embase and Web of Science) up to May 1, 2018 was carried out by two independent reviewers. We included Eligible studies assessed the prognostic impact of pretreatment lymphocytes and had reported hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for endpoints including overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Only English publications were included.

resultsA total of 42 studies comprising 13,272 patients were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. Low pretreatment lymphocyte count was associated with poor OS (HR = 1.27, 95% CI 1.16-1.39,

conclusionsLow pretreatment lymphocyte count may represent an unfavorable prognostic factor for clinical outcomes in patients with solid tumors.

Indexed as

LymphocytePretreatmentPrognosisSolid tumor

Identifiers

PMID31938023
PMCPMC6954501
OpenAlexW3011449611

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.