SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2025
Prognostic value of lymph node ratio in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prognostic value of lymph node ratio after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Integrative prognostic model incorporating high mobility group box 1 subcellular localization and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in early-stage lung adenocarcinoma.Diagnostic pathology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: The lymph node ratio (LNR), by indirectly quantifying the dynamic balance between metastatic burden and host immune clearance, may provide more accurate prognostic stratification information. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the prognostic value of LNR in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases, with the search date up to January 7, 2025. Studies were strictly selected based on pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were merged and analyzed using Stata 16.0. Results: This meta-analysis included 11 studies. High LNR was significantly associated with decreased overall survival (OS) (multivariable HR=1.76, 95% CI=1.36-2.27; univariable HR=2.26, 95% CI=1.95-2.63) and increased risk of shorter disease-free survival (DFS) (multivariable HR=1.66, 95% CI=1.48-1.88). Subgroup analysis showed that regardless of whether the LNR cutoff was set at >0.25 (OS-HR=1.62; DFS-HR=1.82) or ≤0.25 (OS-HR=2.02; DFS-HR=1.58), high LNR indicated poor prognosis. Heterogeneity analysis showed high heterogeneity for OS outcomes (I²=91.8%) and low heterogeneity for DFS outcomes (I²=21.5%). After publication bias was corrected by trim-and-fill method, the combined effect size remained stable. Conclusion: LNR is an independent prognostic factor for survival in NSCLC patients. Future prospective studies are needed to optimize the LNR cutoff values and integrate molecular biomarkers to construct precise prognostic models, which could provide evidence for updating the TNM staging system and personalized treatment. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251022895, identifier (CRD420251022895).
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.