Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36120183›Full record

ArticleJournal of inflammation research2022

Predicting the Recurrence of Operable Cervical Cancer Patients Based on Hemoglobin, Albumin, Lymphocyte, and Platelet (HALP) Score and Classical Clinicopathological Parameters.

Peng Jiang, Wei Kong, Chunxia Gong, Yanlin Chen, Fenglian Li, Lingya Xu, Yang Yang, Shikai Gou, Zhuoying Hu

Abstract 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 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Prognostic significance of HALP score in İdiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis-related mortality.Sarcoidosis, vasculitis, and diffuse lung diseases : official journal of WASOG · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

9 authors.

Peng JiangDepartment of Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0003-1946-9135
Wei KongDepartment of Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China.
Chunxia GongDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Women and Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China.
Yanlin ChenDepartment of Pathology, Women and Children's Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China.
Fenglian LiDepartment of Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China.
Lingya XuDepartment of Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China.
Yang YangDepartment of Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China.
Shikai GouDepartment of Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China.
Zhuoying HuDepartment of Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of hemoglobin, albumin, lymphocyte, and platelet (HALP) score in patients with operable cervical cancer, and on this basis, combined with classical clinicopathological parameters to predict the recurrence of patients. Methods: A total of 1580 patients with stage IA-IIA cervical cancer were randomly divided into training cohort (n=1054) and validation cohort (n=526) according to the predefined ratio of 2:1. In the training cohort, the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and Youden index were used to determine the optimal threshold of HALP score for predicting cervical cancer recurrence. On this basis, the independent related factors with cervical cancer recurrence were screened through univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis, and then a nomogram model was further established. The internal and external validation of the model was carried out in the training cohort and the validation cohort respectively through the consistency index (C-index) and calibration curve. Results: ROC curve and Youden index showed that the optimal threshold of HALP score for predicting cervical cancer recurrence was 39.50. Multivariate analysis confirmed that HALP score and some other classic clinicopathological parameters were independently associated with cervical cancer recurrence. Based on the results of multivariate analysis, a nomogram model for predicting cervical cancer recurrence was successfully constructed. The internal and external calibration curves showed that the fitting degree of the model was good, and the C-index (the C-index of the training cohort and the validation cohort were 0.862 and 0.847, respectively) showed that the prediction accuracy of the model proposed in this study was better than other similar models. Conclusion: HALP score may be a novel predictor for predicting the cervical cancer recurrence. Nomogram model based on HALP score and classical clinicopathological parameters can better predict the recurrence of cervical cancer.

Indexed as

cervical cancerHALP scorenomogram modelpredictrecurrence

Identifiers

PMID36120183
PMCPMC9481301

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.