SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2025
Neutrophil extracellular traps predict poor survival in cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on tissue and circulating biomarkers.
Synthesis in Frontiers in immunology, 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.
- Towards liquid biopsy-based analysis of antitumour immunity.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Interactions Between Circulating Tumor Cells and the Immune System in Colorectal Cancer: Friends or Foes?Cancers · 2026Review
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: Neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs) are fibrous, web like chromatin structures released by activated neutrophils that entrap and immobilize pathogens through histones, granule derived proteolytic enzymes, and myeloperoxidase (MPO) dependent mechanisms. Beyond host defense, NETs have been implicated in tumor progression; yet anticancer activity also has been reported, and findings vary across specimen types (tumor tissue versus blood) and detection methods, antibody panels, leaving their role in oncogenesis uncertain. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to define the prognostic significance of NETs in cancer, stratified by specimen type, detection technique, and antibody panels. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for studies published through August 10, 2023, that reported quantitative NET measurements linked to oncologic outcomes. Results: Fifteen studies (5,202 patients; publication years 2016-2023) reporting hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) and disease free survival (DFS) relative to NET levels met inclusion criteria. Six studies evaluated tumor derived NETs in tissue and nine assessed circulating NETs in blood. Among tissue studies, two used immunohistochemistry for citrullinated histone H3 (H3Cit) alone, and four applied multiplex immunofluorescence for MPO/H3Cit or neutrophil elastase (NE)/H3Cit. Among blood studies, enzyme linked immunosorbent assays targeting MPO/DNA predominated, followed by H3Cit assays. Higher NET levels were significantly associated with worse OS (HR 1.80; 95% CI 1.35-2.41) and DFS (HR 2.26; 95% CI 1.82-2.82), irrespective of tissue or blood based measurement. Prognostic associations were robust for MPO/DNA, H3Cit, and NE, but not for cell free DNA. Conclusion: Elevated NET levels predict poorer outcomes in patients with cancer independent of specimen source and most analytic modalities (except cell free DNA), supporting NETs as a promising biomarker for risk stratification and precision oncologic decision making. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42025596821.
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.