Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34568033›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021

Evaluation and Validation of the Prognostic Value of Serum Albumin to Globulin Ratio in Patients With Cancer Cachexia: Results From a Large Multicenter Collaboration.

Hai-Lun Xie, Qi Zhang, Guo-Tian Ruan, Yi-Zhong Ge, Chun-Lei Hu, Meng-Meng Song, Chun-Hua Song, Xi Zhang, Xiao-Wei Zhang, Xiang-Rui Li and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

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

16 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Hai-Lun XieDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Qi ZhangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Guo-Tian RuanDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Yi-Zhong GeDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Chun-Lei HuDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Meng-Meng SongDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Chun-Hua SongDepartment of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhenzhou, China.
Xi ZhangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Xiao-Wei ZhangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Xiang-Rui LiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Kang-Ping ZhangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Tong LiuDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Ming YangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Meng TangBeijing International Science and Technology Cooperation Base for Cancer Metabolism and Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Hong-Xia XuDepartment of Clinical Nutrition, Daping Hospital, Army Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Han-Ping ShiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Capital Medical University · CNBeijing Shijitan Hospital · CNArmy Medical University · CNZhengzhou University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecently, albumin-globulin ratio (AGR), a serological indicator that reflects nutritional status and systemic inflammatory, has been reported to be associated with the prognosis of various cancers. However, there is currently no research report on its relationship with cancer cachexia.

objectivesThis study aimed to explore the prognostic value of AGR in patients with cancer cachexia through a multicenter retrospective analysis.

methodsWe recruited 2,364 patients with cancer cachexia and randomly divided the patients into training and validation cohorts at a ratio of 7:3. The optimal stratification method was used to determine the optimal cutoff value of AGR. The survival curve was evaluated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox regression proportional-hazards model was used to determine independent prognostic factors in patients with cancer cachexia. The time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curve was used to compare the prognostic performance of different malnutrition evaluation tools.

resultsThe optimal cutoff value of AGR is 1.24 in patients with cancer cachexia. Increasing AGR was associated with survival in a dose-response manner with a forward L-shape. Compared with the high AGR group, the low AGR group had a shorter overall survival; and there was consistency in training and validation cohorts. In the stratified analysis of TNM stage, AGR has good prognostic distinguishing ability for advanced patients. Multivariate survival analysis determined that low AGR was an independent risk factor affecting all-cause mortality in patients with cancer cachexia. In addition, compared with other malnutrition evaluation tools, AGR could effectively stratify the prognosis of patients with cancer cachexia.

conclusionAGR was an independent prognostic factor affecting patients with cancer cachexia, especially in advanced patients. Compared with other malnutrition evaluation tools, AGR can effectively stratify the prognosis of patients with cancer cachexia.

Indexed as

albumin–globulin ratiocachexiacancerinflammationnutritionprognostic

Identifiers

PMID34568033
PMCPMC8461248
OpenAlexW3199936543

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.