ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2023
Prognostic significance of controlling nutritional status score for patients with gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta‑analysis.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Prognostic value of the Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) score in cancer: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Pooled it
- Prognostic and clinicopathological value of the controlling nutritional status score in patients with multiple myeloma: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Prognostic and clinicopathological value of the controlling nutritional status (CONUT) score in patients with head and neck cancer: a meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Early Nutritional-Immune Biomarker Trajectories Following Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Prospective Longitudinal Cohort Study.Nutrients · 2026Article
- Preoperative CONUT score predicts postoperative complications in stage I-III gastric cancer patients undergoing curative gastric resections.Turkish journal of surgery · 2025Article
- Pancreatic atrophy after gastric cancer surgery: influencing factors and effects on BMI and quality of life.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Dysregulation of systemic immunity and its clinical application in gastric cancer.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Review
- Association of Mediterranean Diet Adherence with Disease Progression Characteristics, Lifestyle Factors and Overall Survival in Gastric Cancer Patients.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Observational
- 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is a need to identify potentially useful biomarker(s) for the prediction of prognostic outcomes in patients diagnosed with gastric cancer. This meta-analysis provided updated evidence on the association of controlling nutritional status (CONUT) score with survival and other clinicopathological outcomes in patients with gastric cancer. PubMed and Scopus databases were systematically searched. The review included studies, observational in design, that were conducted among patients with gastric cancer and had documented the association of CONUT score with outcomes of interest. The primary outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) along with tumour size and extent (T status), nodal status (N status) and tumour staging (TNM staging). STATA was used for statistical analysis. The meta-analysis was conducted with 17 studies. The 5-year OS [hazard ratio (HR), 1.75; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.55, 1.96], RFS (HR, 1.58; 95% CI: 1.30, 1.91) and CSS (HR, 1.89; 95% CI: 1.01, 3.52) were comparatively poorer in the high CONUT group, than in low CONUT group. High CONUT score was associated with increased risk of having T3/T4 tumour [odds ratio (OR), 1.64; 95% CI: 1.16, 2.34], N2/N3 nodal status (OR, 1.44; 95% CI: 1.17, 1.77) and stage III/IV tumour (OR, 1.64; 95% CI: 1.43, 1.88). The risk of microvascular invasion (OR, 1.46; 95% CI: 1.20, 1.77) and post-operative complications (OR, 1.64; 95% CI: 1.31, 2.06) was higher in those with high CONUT. There were no differences in the risk of poorly differentiated tumour and need for adjuvant chemotherapy between the two groups. Findings suggested that preoperative assessment of CONUT score may be included in the routine assessment of patients with gastric cancer due to its association with survival and other clinical as well as pathological outcomes.
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.