Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40529922›Full record

ArticleHepatobiliary surgery and nutrition2025

Prognostic factors in gallbladder cancer: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.

Xiaoqian Hu, Di Zeng, Ningyuan Wen, Yaoqun Wang, Jiong Lu, Bei Li

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition, 2025. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Xiaoqian Hu *Division of Biliary Surgery, Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Di Zeng *Division of Biliary Surgery, Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Ningyuan WenDivision of Biliary Surgery, Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yaoqun WangDivision of Biliary Surgery, Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Jiong LuDivision of Biliary Surgery, Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Bei LiDivision of Biliary Surgery, Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Gallbladder cancer (GBC) is one of the most common biliary cancers and is characterized by its high malignancy. Moreover, the incidence of GBC has been increasing over the decades, partly due to advancements in diagnostic techniques and devices. The purpose of this systematic review is to provide a comprehensive assessment of factors influencing the prognosis of GBC. We aim to identify and evaluate both established and controversial prognostic factors, including lymphocyte-monocyte ratio (LMR), adjuvant therapy, carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA199), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), tumor mutation status, surgical margins, the presence of gallstones, and jaundice. Methods: We conducted a systematic search of eligible studies in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase. Our analysis focused on data from GBC patients who had undergone surgical resection, with the primary outcome being overall survival. Forest plots were generated using hazard ratios (HRs) to visualize the effect sizes, and the Quality in Prognostic Factor Studies (QUIPS) tool was employed to assess the risk of bias. Results: This study synthesized data from 52 studies, encompassing a total of 23,174 patients over the period of 2000 to 2022. Notably, several factors significantly influenced the outcomes of GBC, including LMR (HR =2.17), CEA (HR =1.81), CA199 (HR =1.56), lymph node stage (HR =2.03), T stage (HR =2.37), presence of invasion (HR =1.74), tumor location (HR =1.42), and surgical margins (HR =2.66). Additionally, chemotherapy (HR =0.75) and radiotherapy (HR =0.56) demonstrated marked improvements in overall survival compared to control arms. Jaundice and the presence of gallstones were not defined as independent predictors, as they reflect advanced stage symptoms in GBC. Conclusions: The findings from this comprehensive review offer valuable insights into the assessment of the necessity for aggressive treatment approaches and the prognostication of GBC patients. Furthermore, there is a need for well-designed, ongoing studies to further advance our understanding of this challenging malignancy.

Indexed as

gallbladder cancer (GBC)meta-analysisprognosisPrognostic factors

Identifiers

PMID40529922
PMCPMC12170136

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.