ArticleScientific reports2026
Diagnostic utility and discriminative ability of cholesterol-modified prognostic nutritional index and inflammatory indicators in colorectal cancer: a retrospective case-control study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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.
- Pre-radiotherapy modified prognostic nutritional index predicts acute radiation enteritis in patients with cervical cancer undergoing radiotherapy: A retrospective study.Oncology letters · 2026Article
- Association of prognostic nutritional index with fecal incontinence and fecal incontinence severity index in individuals with osteoporosis: mediating roles of C-reactive protein and gamma-glutamyl transferase.Frontiers in nutrition · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Malnutrition and altered biochemical parameters are common in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic utility and discriminative ability of nutritional indices, including cholesterol-modified prognostic nutritional index (CPNI), prognostic nutritional index (PNI), nutritional risk index (NRI), and controlling nutritional status (CONUT) score in CRC. This retrospective case-control study included 100 CRC patients and 100 healthy controls. Baseline clinical and laboratory data were compared between the two groups to determine the capacity of these indices to distinguish CRC patients from healthy individuals. CRC patients demonstrated significantly lower nutritional markers (BMI, HDL, total protein, albumin, PNI, and NRI; p < 0.05) and markedly higher inflammatory/tumor-related parameters (CA-19.9, CEA, CRP, and CPNI; p < 0.001) compared to controls. Malnutrition prevalence, defined by CPNI, was significantly higher in the CRC group (54% vs. 10%, p < 0.001). ROC analysis identified CPNI as the most effective diagnostic discriminator (AUC = 0.804), followed by NRI (AUC = 0.756) and PNI (AUC = 0.728). Multivariate analysis revealed that elevated CPNI (OR = 2.339) and PNI (OR = 3.386) were independent indicators of CRC presence. No indices significantly correlated with tumor localization, size, or lymph node involvement, suggesting they reflect systemic status rather than local tumor burden. CPNI, PNI, and NRI demonstrated strong diagnostic performance in distinguishing CRC patients from healthy controls and appear to reflect systemic nutritional and inflammatory status at the time of diagnosis. In contrast, the CONUT score showed limited clinical utility, and none of the indices were associated with tumor size, location, or lymph node metastasis in this cross-sectional cohort. While these markers are effective diagnostic indicators, prospective longitudinal studies are required to validate their actual prognostic value regarding survival and recurrence.
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.