Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33987230›Full record

ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2021

Geriatric nutritional risk index as an independent prognostic factor in locally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated using radical concurrent chemoradiotherapy: a retrospective cohort study.

Qing-Nan Tang, Hui-Zhi Qiu, Xiao-Qing Sun, Shan-Shan Guo, Li-Ting Liu, Yue-Feng Wen, Sai-Lan Liu, Hao-Jun Xie, Yu-Jing Liang, Xue-Song Sun and 8 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Integration of geriatric nutritional risk index and sarcopenia for prognostic assessment in nasopharyngeal carcinoma receiving concurrent chemoradiotherapy: a large-scale long-term retrospective study.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

18 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Qing-Nan TangSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Hui-Zhi QiuSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Xiao-Qing SunSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Shan-Shan GuoSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Li-Ting LiuSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Yue-Feng WenSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Sai-Lan LiuSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Hao-Jun XieSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Yu-Jing LiangSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Xue-Song SunSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Xiao-Yun LiSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Jin-Jie YanSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Jin-Hao YangSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Dong-Xiang WenSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Ling GuoSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Lin-Quan TangSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Qiu-Yan ChenSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Hai-Qiang MaiSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine; Guangdong Key Laboratory of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South ChinaSun Yat-sen University · CNKey Laboratory of Guangdong Province · CNSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNutritional status is a key factor influencing the prognosis of patients with cancer. The Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) has been used to predict mortality risk and long-term outcomes. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the predictive value of pretreatment GNRI in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC).

methodsA total of 1,065 patients with biopsy-proven non-disseminated nasopharyngeal carcinoma were included. Based on a cutoff value of pretreatment GNRI, patients were divided into two groups (low ≤107.7 and high >107.7). Combining GNRI and baseline Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) DNA, all patients were further stratified into three risk groups, namely, high-risk (high EBV DNA and low GNRI), low-risk (low EBV DNA and high GNRI), and medium-risk (except the above) groups. Multivariate analyses were performed using the Cox proportional hazards model to assess the predictive value of the GNRI.

resultsAmong the 1,065 patients, 527 (49.5%) and 538 (50.5%) were divided into low and high GNRI groups, respectively. Within a median follow-up of 83 months, patients with a high GNRI score exhibited significantly higher overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) compared to those with low GNRI scores (P<0.05). Multivariate analyses revealed that high GNRI is an independent prognostic factor for OS and PFS (hazard ratio, HR, 0.471, 95% CI, 0.270-0.822, P=0.008; HR 0.638, 95% CI, 0.433-0.941, P=0.023, respectively). Using a combination of baseline GNRI and EBV DNA, a satisfying separation of survival curves between different risk groups for OS, PFS, DMFS was observed. The survival rates of patients in the high-risk group were significantly lower than those in the low- and medium-risk groups (all P<0.001). The combined classification was demonstrated to be an independent prognostic factor for OS and PFS after adjustment using multivariate analysis.

conclusionsPretreatment GNRI is an independent prognostic factor for NPC patients. The combination of baseline GNRI score and EBV DNA level improved the prognostic stratification of NPC patients.

Indexed as

Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI)Nasopharyngeal carcinomaprognosissurvival analysis

Identifiers

PMID33987230
PMCPMC8105839
OpenAlexW3138098034

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.