ArticlePeerJ2020
A retrospective study on the prognostic value of preoperative C-reactive protein to albumin ratio in patients with oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma.
Article in PeerJ, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Modified Naples Prognostic Score for Postoperative Prognostic Stratification in Patients with Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Journal of inflammation research · 2025Article
- Article
- Advanced lung cancer inflammation index predicts survival outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma patients receiving immunotherapy.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- The value of the Advanced Lung Cancer Inflammation Index (ALI) in assessing the prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with camrelizumab: a retrospective cohort study.Annals of translational medicine · 2022Article
- Prognostic Value of C-Reactive Protein-to-Albumin Ratio in Head and Neck Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Advanced Lung Cancer Inflammation Index Predicts Survival Outcomes of Patients With Oral Cavity Cancer Following Curative Surgery.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough the C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio (CAR) can predict poor outcomes in assorted cancers, its prognostic value in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) remains unclear. We explored the value of preoperative CAR in predicting clinical outcomes in OSCC patients treated with radical surgery.
methodsAll the recommended cutoff values were defined analyzing receiver operating characteristic curves or overall survival (OS). Dichotomization was performed on the basis of optimal CAR cutoff, and we compared the clinicopathological features between groups. Kaplan-Meier analysis was also performed to compare OS curves between the two groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses using the Cox proportional hazards model were conducted to find the clinical characteristics that were most closely correlated with disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). A nomogram incorporated CAR and several clinicopathological factors was established to predict prognosis and its accuracy was evaluated using concordance index (c-index).
resultsIn this retrospective study, a total of 326 patients with newly diagnosis of OSCC and received primary surgery between 2008 and 2017 were enrolled. Through the executed ROC curve analyses, the optimal CAR cutoff derived was 0.195 (area under the curve = 0.718,
conclusionsPreoperative CAR could constitute an independent prognostic indicator for OS and DFS prediction in OSCC patients treated with curative surgery. The established nomogram that incorporated CAR and prognostic factors might increase the accuracy of prognostic prediction for patients with OSCC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.