ArticleCureus2025
Prognostic Value of the C-reactive Protein-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (CLR) for Lupus Nephritis: Comparison With Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) and Fibrinogen-to-Albumin Ratio (FAR).
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- C-reactive protein-to-lymphocyte ratio and perforation in pediatric appendicitis.Surgery today · 2026Article
- Peripheral Blood Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio Combined With Fibrinogen-to-Albumin Ratio Assists in Identifying Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Activity and Lupus Nephritis.APMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic value of C-reactive protein-to-lymphocyte ratio (CLR) in lupus nephritis (LN), and compare its utility with neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio (FAR). Methods We retrospectively enrolled 359 newly diagnosed or immunosuppressant-free LN patients, including 215 with renal biopsy data. A composite endpoint was used to define poor renal prognosis. Baseline CLR, NLR, and FAR at first hospitalization were compared between patients with and without poor prognosis, and their correlations with clinical characteristics were analyzed. Prognostic value was assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) Cox regression. Results Over a median follow-up of 36 months, 137 patients reached the composite endpoint. Baseline CLR, NLR, and FAR were significantly elevated in the endpoint group. CLR exhibited the strongest correlation with disease activity (SLEDAI) compared to NLR and FAR, and correlated significantly with active pathological lesions (activity index, endocapillary hypercellularity). The area under the ROC curve (AUC) for CLR in predicting poor prognosis was 85.94%, significantly higher than that of NLR or FAR. Patients with CLR >2.23 (optimal cut-off) had significantly poorer renal outcomes. LASSO Cox regression identified CLR as an independent predictor of poor renal prognosis, regardless of whether pathological parameters were included. Conclusion CLR demonstrates superior prognostic value for renal outcomes in LN compared to NLR and FAR. Its strong association with disease activity and pathological findings suggests CLR may serve as a valuable, readily available early warning biomarker in clinical practice.
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.