Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34360768›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2021

Inflammation-Related Biomarkers for the Prediction of Prognosis in Colorectal Cancer Patients.

Takehito Yamamoto, Kenji Kawada, Kazutaka Obama

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 309 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
309citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

309 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Takehito YamamotoDepartment of Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-2236-7124
Kenji KawadaDepartment of Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-4336-6937
Kazutaka ObamaDepartment of Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-2924-6701

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the leading cause of cancer deaths around the world. It is necessary to identify patients with poor prognosis or with high risk for recurrence so that we can selectively perform intensive treatments such as preoperative and/or postoperative chemotherapy and extended surgery. The clinical usefulness of inflammation-related prognostic biomarkers available from routine blood examination has been reported in many types of cancer, e.g., neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), lymphocyte-C-reactive protein ratio (LCR), platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), lymphocyte-monocyte ratio (LMR), and so on. Moreover, some scoring systems based on circulating blood cell counts and albumin concentration have been also reported to predict cancer patients' prognosis, such as the Glasgow prognostic score (GPS), systemic inflammation score (SIS), and prognostic nutritional index (PNI). The optimal biomarker and optimal cutoff value of the markers can be different depending on the cancer type. In this review, we summarize the prognostic impact of each inflammation-related marker in CRC.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorColorectal NeoplasmsHumansInflammationLeukocyte CountNutrition AssessmentPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisBiomarkers, Tumorcolorectal cancerinflammation-related markerprognostic biomarker

Identifiers

PMID34360768
PMCPMC8348168

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.