SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2026
Association between the prognostic nutritional index and prognosis in patients with non-small cell lung cancer undergoing curative lung resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To explore the prognostic value of the prognostic nutritional index (PNI) in patients undergoing curative surgery for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: Relevant studies published up to October 2025 were searched in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane. Observational studies assessing the association between PNI and overall, recurrence-free, or cancer-specific survival after curative resection of NSCLC were included. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was evaluated by the I² statistic, with sensitivity analyses and assessment for publication bias. Results: A total of 11 studies were included in the analysis. Meta-analysis indicated that higher PNI significantly associated with longer OS (HR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.72-0.87, P<0.00001), RFS (HR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.51-0.80, P<0.0001), and CSS (HR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.31-0.80, P = 0.004). Substantial heterogeneity was observed in the OS analysis (I²=88%), but the results were robust in sensitivity analyses. Heterogeneity was low in RFS and CSS (I²=34% and 0%). The association with OS did not change significantly after adjustment for publication bias. Conclusion: PNI is an independent prognostic indicator for patients undergoing curative surgery for NSCLC. It provides an economical and convenient tool for risk stratification by integrating nutritional and immune function. It is recommended that PNI be incorporated into the preoperative assessment to guide personalized interventions. Future prospective studies are needed to optimize the PNI cutoff value and explore its synergistic effects with multidisciplinary treatments. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251237417, identifier CRD420251237417.
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.