ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2022
Low absolute CD4
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The prognostic predictive SER model for NK/T-cell lymphoma in the era of modern immunotherapy.Cancer cell international · 2026Article
- A context-aware interpretive framework for lymphocyte immunophenotyping by flow cytometry.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Predictive value of pre-treatment T lymphocyte subsets in patients with extranodal natural killer/T-cell lymphoma.Annals of hematology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Lymphopenia at diagnosis is considered a negative prognostic factor for patients with extra-nodal natural killer (NK)/T-cell lymphoma (ENKTL), especially that of the absolute cluster of differentiation 4 Methods: We analyzed the clinical data of 176 patients who met the inclusion criteria in Cancer Center of Integrated Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Southern Medical University from 2000 to 2018, including baseline clinical factors and ACD4C detected by flow cytometry, and examined the correlation between the results and clinical parameters and long-term outcomes. Results: The complete response rate of the high ACD4C group was 57.6%, which was significantly higher than that of the low ACD4C group (15.1%, P<0.001). The univariate analysis results showed that at a median follow-up time of 58.2 months, patients with a high ACD4C had significantly superior progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) (P=0.034 and P=0.001, respectively). The multivariate analysis results revealed that Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) and the ACD4C were independent prognostic factors for OS [RR (95% CI): 2.288 (1.209-4.328), P=0.011 and RR (95% CI): 2.058 (1.070-3.968), P=0.031, respectively]. ECOG PS was also an independent prognostic factor for PFS [RR (95% CI): 1.858 (1.064-3.244), P=0.029], while ACD4C tended to be independently correlated with PFS (P=0.085). Conclusions: In this large cohort study, we found that the ACD4C was associated with survival outcomes in ENKTL patients. It is a potential biomarker, which may potentially be applied to clinical.
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.