ArticleBMC gastroenterology2025
Association of clinicopathological factor with lymph node metastasis in rectal cancer patients: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionSystemic inflammatory response (SIR) indicators serve as predictive factors for lymph node metastasis (LNM) in various cancers. This study aimed to investigate the association of platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) with LNM in rectal cancer and to identify clinicopathological factors linked to LNM.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 181 rectal cancer patients who underwent surgical resection. Preoperative NLR and PLR were calculated from blood samples, with optimal cutoff values determined by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. Associations between NLR/PLR and clinicopathological features were evaluated, risk factors for LNM were analyzed via univariate and multivariate logistic regression.
resultsNo significant differences were observed between the high NLR (H-NLR) and low NLR (L-NLR) groups in terms of clinicopathological characteristics, including TNM stage, perineural invasion (PNI), lymphovascular invasion (LVI), or serum levels of CEA and CA19-9 respectively (p > 0.05).In contrast, the high PLR (H-PLR) group showed significantly higher prevalence of several adverse pathological features: The H-PLR group had a higher positive PNI (54.2% vs.25.0%,p = 0.04), greater positive LVI(51.6% vs.28.6%,p = 0.025),and more positive TDs (14.4% vs.0,p = 0.028), increased lymph node metastasis (52.9% vs.17.9%,p < 0.001), more elevated CEA (43.1% vs.14.3%,p = 0.005) and more advanced tumor stage (stage II + stage III,81% vs.67.9%,p = 0.003).Univariate analysis identified several factors significantly associated with LNM: T stage (OR = 3.156, 95%CI:1.580-6.303),positive PNI (OR = 6.182,95%CI:3.242-11.787),positive LVI (OR = 10.271,95%CI:5.177-20.375),H-PLR(OR = 5.175,95%CI:1.870-14.321),positive TDs (OR = 3.390,95%CI:1.261-9.117),TLN(OR = 1.053,95%CI:1.005-1.103),elevated CEA(OR = 3.313,95%CI:1.655-5.920) and elevated CA199 (OR = 2.248,95%CI:1.012-4.992) were correlated with LNM using univariate analysis, but only positive LVI(adjusted OR = 6.203,95%CI:2.892-13.303,p < 0.001) and positive PNI (adjusted OR = 3.086,95%CI:1.341-7.102,p = 0.008) were the independent risk factors for LNM using multivariate analysis.
conclusionH-PLR but not H-NLR may be associated with LNM, positive LVI and PNI were independent risk factors for LNM in RC.
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.