ArticleCancer medicine2023
Prognostic importance of the preoperative New-Naples prognostic score for patients with gastric cancer.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Significance of Naples prognostic score for postoperative complications after colorectal cancer surgery.Surgery today · 2025Article
- Article
- A Novel Survival Prediction Nomogram Based on the Naples Prognostic Score and Clinicopathological Factors for Postoperative Hypopharyngeal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Patients.Journal of inflammation research · 2025Article
- Naples Prognostic Score (NPS) as a Novel Prognostic Score for Stage III Breast Cancer Patients: A Real-World Retrospective Study.Breast cancer (Dove Medical Press) · 2025Article
- Naples Prognostic Score as a Novel Prognostic Prediction Tool for Resectable Locally Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma After Neoadjuvant Therapy.Journal of inflammation research · 2025Article
- Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) Score as Prognostic Indicator in Stage IV Gastric Cancer with Chronic Intestinal Failure.Nutrients · 2024Article
- A prognostic marker LTBP1 is associated with epithelial mesenchymal transition and can promote the progression of gastric cancer.Functional & integrative genomics · 2024Article
- Clinical significance of the modified Naples prognostic score in patients with stage II-III colon cancer undergoing curative resection: a retrospective study from the real world.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Naples Prognostic Score: A Novel Predictor of Survival in Patients with Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.Journal of inflammation research · 2024Article
- Clinical Implications of Naples Prognostic Score for Patients with Resected Cholangiocarcinoma: A Real-World Experience.Journal of inflammation research · 2024Article
- Prognostic importance of the preoperative New-Naples prognostic score for patients with gastric cancer.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- The Naples Prognostic Score Is an Independent Prognostic Factor for Gastric Cancer Patients Who Receive Curative Treatment.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe wide applicability of the Naples prognostic score (NPS) is still worthy of further study in gastric cancer (GC). This study aimed to construct a New-NPS based on the differences in immunity and nutrition in patients with upper and lower gastrointestinal tumors to help obtain an individualized prediction of prognosis.
methodsThis study retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent radical gastrectomy from April 2014 to September 2016. The cutoff values of the preoperative neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR), serum albumin (Alb), and total cholesterol (TC) were calculated by ROC curve analysis. ROC and t-ROC were used to evaluate the accuracy of the prognostic markers. The Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test were used to analyze the overall survival probability. Univariate and multivariate analyses based on Cox risk regression were used to show the independent predictors. The nomogram was made by R studio. The predictive accuracy of nomogram was assessed using a calibration plot, concordance index (C-index), and decision curve.
resultsA total of 737 patients were included in training cohort, 411 patients were included in validation cohort. ROC showed that the New-NPS was more suitable for predicting the prognosis of GC patients. NPS = 2 indicated a poor prognosis. Multivariate analysis showed that CEA (P = 0.026), Borrmann type (P = 0.001), pTNM (P < 0.001), New-NPS (P < 0.001), and nerve infiltration (P = 0.035) were independent risk factors for prognosis.
conclusionThe New-NPS based on the cutoff values of NLR, LMR, Alb, and TC is not only suitable for predicting prognosis but can also be combined with clinicopathological characteristics to construct a nomogram model for GC patients.
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.