ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2021
Is CONUT score a prognostic index in patients with diffuse large cell lymphoma?
Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Prognostic value of the controlling nutritional status (CONUT) score in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Prognostic impact of the controlling nutritional status score in patients with hematologic malignancies: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Pooled it
- Prognostic value of the CONUT score in newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.Oncology letters · 2026Article
- Association between pre-transplant CONUT score and pneumonia risk after allogeneic stem cell transplantation in acute leukemia.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2025Article
- Assessment of Nutritional Status in Children with Familial Mediterranean Fever Using Prognostic Nutritional Index and Controlling Nutritional Status Score: Relationship with Clinical Findings and MEFV Mutations.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The controlling nutritional status score as a predictor of survival in hematological malignancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in nutrition · 2024Review
- The prognostic value of controlling nutritional status (CONUT) score-based nomogram on extranodal natural killer/T cell lymphoma patients.Annals of hematology · 2023Article
- Association of the Controlling Nutritional Status Score with the Development of Postoperative Paralytic Ileus After Radical Cystectomy: Retrospective Cohort Study.Urology research & practice · 2023Article
- Article
- Influence of Nutritional Parameters on the Evolution, Severity and Prognosis of Critically Ill Patients with COVID-19.Nutrients · 2022Article
- The Relationship between the SARC-F Score and the Controlling Nutritional Status Score in Gastrointestinal Diseases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Prognostic value of nutritional status in patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection-related lymphoma.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background/aim: The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) score on the prognosis in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Materials and methods: The present study was a retrospective study. The CONUT score was calculated based on serum albumin, total cholesterol and lymphocyte levels. This study included a total of 266 patients, 131 (49.2%) were female and 135 (50.8%) were male. The median follow-up period was 51 months (range: 1–190). Results: The median age was 64 years. The cut off CONUT was 1.5. There was a significant difference between patients with high (≥ 2) or low (< 2) CONUT scores in terms of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The 5-year OS and PFS in patients with high CONUT score was 52.1% and 49.7%. The 5-year OS and PFS in patients with low CONUT score was 79.8% and 75.6% (p < 0.001). In the multivariate analysis for OS, age ≥ 65 years (HR = 1.80, p = 0.028), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) > 1 (HR = 2.04, p = 0.006), stage IIIA–IVB disease (HR = 2.75, p = 0.001) and the CONUT score (HR = 1.15, p = 0.003) were found statistically significant. In the multivariate analysis for PFS, age ≥ 65 years (HR = 2.02, p = 0.007), stage IIIA–IVB disease (HR = 2.42, p = 0.002) and the CONUT score (HR = 1.19, p = 0.001) were found to be significant parameters. Conclusion: High CONUT score reduces OS and PFS in DLBCL. CONUT score is an independent, strong prognostic index in patients with DLBCL.
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.