ArticleJNCI cancer spectrum2023
Prognostic evaluation of stage I lung adenocarcinoma based on systematic inflammatory response.
Article in JNCI cancer spectrum, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-world efficacy and prognostic factor analysis of tislelizumab versus sintilimab in advanced non-small cell lung cancer.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- A predictive model for evaluating the efficacy of immunotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer patients: A real-world study.The Journal of international medical research · 2025Article
- Prognostic Power of the Naples Score in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Can Inflammation and Nutrition Predict Survival?Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Development and validation of an inflammation-nutrition indices-based nomogram for predicting early recurrence in patients with stage IB lung adenocarcinoma.Scientific reports · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to construct an effective nomogram based on the clinical and laboratory characteristics to predict the prognosis of stage I lung adenocarcinoma with EGFR alteration.
methodsA retrospective study was performed of 913 eligible patients with EGFR alteration after surgery at Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital. The peripheral blood indicators were included in the nomogram. Calibration plots, concordance index, decision curve analysis, and X-tile software were used in this study. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test.
resultsNeutrophil to lymphocyte ratio and platelet to lymphocyte ratio were independent risk factors for RFS. The calibration curves for RFS probabilities showed good agreement between the nomogram prediction and actual observation. Furthermore, the nomogram, including neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio and platelet to lymphocyte ratio had a higher concordance index (0.732, 95% confidence interval = 0.706 to 0.758) than that without neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio or platelet to lymphocyte ratio (0.713, 95% confidence interval = 0.686 to 0.740), and decision curve analysis plots showed that the nomogram with neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio and platelet to lymphocyte ratio had better clinical practicability. Additionally, the patients were divided into 2 groups according to cutoff values of risk points, and statistically significant differences in RFS and overall survival were observed between the high-risk and low-risk groups (P < .001).
conclusionsHigh pretreatment levels of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio and platelet to lymphocyte ratio were strongly associated with a worse prognosis in stage I EGFR-altered lung adenocarcinomas. Besides, the proposed nomogram with neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio and platelet to lymphocyte ratio presented a better prediction ability for the survival of those 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.