Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35210808›Full record

ArticleJournal of inflammation research2022

Combination of Nutritional Risk Index and Handgrip Strength on the Survival of Patients with Cancer Cachexia: A Multi- Center Cohort Study.

Hailun Xie, Guotian Ruan, Qi Zhang, Yizhong Ge, Mengmeng Song, Xi Zhang, Xiaoyue Liu, Shiqi Lin, Xiaowei Zhang, Xiangrui Li and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of inflammation research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

15 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hailun Xie *Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100038, People's Republic of China.
Guotian Ruan *Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100038, People's Republic of China.
Qi Zhang *Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100038, People's Republic of China.
Yizhong GeDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100038, People's Republic of China.
Mengmeng SongDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100038, People's Republic of China.
Xi ZhangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100038, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0002-3869-3856
Xiaoyue LiuDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100038, People's Republic of China.
Shiqi LinDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100038, People's Republic of China.
Xiaowei ZhangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100038, People's Republic of China.
Xiangrui LiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100038, People's Republic of China.
Kangping ZhangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100038, People's Republic of China.
Ming YangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100038, People's Republic of China.
Meng TangDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100038, People's Republic of China.
Minghua CongDepartment of Comprehensive Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Hanping ShiDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgery/Department of Clinical Nutrition, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100038, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0003-4514-8693
China International Science and Technology Cooperation · CNChinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe nutritional risk index (NRI) and handgrip strength (HGS) are useful indicators of nutritional and physical status, respectively, both of them can predict the prognosis of many cancers; however, the predictive accuracy of a single indicator is unsatisfactory. Whether the combination of NRI and HGS could enhance the stratification of the prognosis of patients with cancer cachexia. PATIENTS AND

methodsThe study population was randomly divided into training and validation cohorts. We combined NRI and HGS and constructed the NRI-HGS score. Restricted cubic splines were used to assess the associations between NRI, HGS, and all-cause mortality. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate the survival probability of the patients. The Cox proportional hazards risk model was used to analyze survival and prognostic factors.

resultsLow NRI and low HGS were independent predictors of poor prognosis in patients with cancer cachexia. The NRI-HGS score showed a better prognostic stratification than either NRI or HGS. The co-occurrence of low NRI and low HGS was associated with an approximately 1.8-fold increased risk of mortality. The NRI-HGS score could effectively distinguish patients with a poor prognosis at different pathological stages. Furthermore, we constructed a novel prognostic nomogram based on NRI and HGS. The concordance index and calibration plot confirmed that the nomogram had good prognostic accuracy. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the nomogram reached >0.8, which was much higher than that of the traditional tumor-node-metastasis staging system. The nomogram provided better prognostic stratification for patients with cancer cachexia.

conclusionLow NRI and low HGS are independent prognostic indicators in cancer cachexia. The combination of NRI and HGS improve prognostic stratification for patients with cancer cachexia. Our study suggests combining nutritional and physical status in future cachexia research.

Indexed as

cancer cachexiahandgrip strengthnutritional risk indexprognostic

Identifiers

PMID35210808
PMCPMC8858023
OpenAlexW4213060200

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.