ReviewNew microbes and new infections2026
Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio as a biomarker in erythema nodosum leprosum: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in New microbes and new infections, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Integrated skin-lesion transcriptomics prioritises biomarker-candidate host-response genes with pharmacological annotation in leprosy type 1 reaction.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Erythema nodosum leprosum (ENL) is a severe type 2 leprosy reaction causing recurrent episodes, nerve damage, and disability. Diagnosis still relies on clinical assessment and tests often unavailable in resource-limited settings. The neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), derived from routine complete blood counts, has been proposed as a low-cost inflammatory biomarker. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess differences in NLR between ENL and non-reactional leprosy. Methods: Following PRISMA 2020 and a PECO framework, we searched PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Google Scholar up to 20 November 2025 for observational studies reporting NLR in ENL versus non-reactional leprosy. Quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Pooled mean differences were estimated using a fixed-effect model in RevMan 5.4.1, with heterogeneity evaluated by Cochran's Q and the I Results: Of 677 records, five observational studies (162 ENL and 423 non-reactional leprosy patients) met the inclusion criteria. NLR was higher in ENL, with a pooled mean difference of 5.79 (95% CI 4.58-6.99; I Conclusions: NLR is markedly elevated in ENL compared with non-reactional leprosy, supporting its potential as a simple, low-cost biomarker. Prospective studies are needed to define optimal cut-off values for routine use.
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.