SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2024
Prognostic value of lymphocyte to monocyte ratio in patients with esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prognostic value of lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio in patients with small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Prehabilitation Prior to Colorectal Cancer Surgery: Impact and Implementation.Journal of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Higher pre-treatment lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio predicts better tumor shrinkage after external beam radiotherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Temporal Dynamic Machine Learning Prediction of Postoperative Gastrointestinal Dysfunction Duration in Esophageal Cancer: Integrating Preoperative and Perioperative Routine Blood Temporal Data and Dynamic Ultrasonic Features.International journal of general medicine · 2026Article
- A nomogram integrating machine learning-derived CT radiomics and clinical characteristics for prognostic assessment in patients with locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy with or without immunotherapy.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- The Evaluation of Diagnostic, Prognostic, and Predictive Role of Hematologic Inflammatory Indices NLR, PLR, and LMR in Common Solid Tumors.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Review
- Biomarkers of Survival in Patients with Colorectal Liver Metastases Treated with Percutaneous Microwave Ablation.Cancers · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To report the largest systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate prognostic value of lymphocyte to monocyte ratio (LMR) in patients with esophageal cancer. Methods: We conducted a systematic literature retrieval via PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane until December, 2023 for studies which evaluated the prognostic value of LMR in patients with esophageal cancer. Outcomes measured were overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), relapse-free survival (RFS), and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: 11 studies including 3,377 patients with esophageal cancer were included for meta-analysis. Meta-analysis demonstrated that OS (HR: 1.65; 95% CI: 1.19, 2.31; Conclusions: Low LMR is associated with poor prognosis in patients with esophageal cancer. Due to the simple availability and low cost of routine blood tests in clinical practice, LMR can be widely used to assess prognosis and construct risk prediction models for patients with esophageal cancer. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO, identifier CRD42024509796.
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.