SynthesisBMC urology2026
Prognostic role of preoperative plasma fibrinogen-to-albumin ratio in urological carcinomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC urology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGrowing evidence indicates that the pre-operative ratio of fibrinogen to albumin (FAR/AFR) can act as a prognostic predictor for different kinds of cancer. Although a previous meta-analysis briefly involved urological malignancies, it only incorporated one study for bladder cancer (BC) and one for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with limited data. To date, a comprehensive and systematic quantitative assessment of plasma FAR/AFR as a prognostic indicator in urological cancers remains lacking.
objectiveThis meta-analysis intended to comprehensively investigate the prognostic significance of plasma FAR/AFR in individuals with urological malignancies.
methodsA thorough search of the PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases was carried out up to March 2026, leading to the incorporation of 6 studies for this meta-analysis. The research computed hazard ratios (HRs) together with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to evaluate disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS).
resultsThe study included a total of 1,603 participants. Patients suffering from RCC and BC who showed an increase in pre-operation FAR or a decrease in pre-operation AFR had poorer overall survival (combined HR = 2.36, 95% CI = 1.92-2.91; p < 0.001), cancer-specific survival (combined HR = 2.27, 95% CI = 1.77-2.91; p = 0.003), and disease-free survival (combined HR = 2.32, 95% CI = 1.62-3.31; p < 0.001).Analysis based on cancer type showed that an increased pre-surgical FAR or a decreased pre-surgical AFR was associated with poorer overall survival in RCC) (combined HR = 3.19, 95% CI = 1.84-5.54, p < 0.001) and also in BC (combined HR = 2.25, 95% CI = 1.80-2.81, p < 0.001).
conclusionsIncreased FAR or decreased AFR act as independent markers of unfavorable survival prognosis in patients with RCC and BC.
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.