SynthesisFrontiers in nutrition2026
Prognostic value of the Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) score in cancer: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
Synthesis in Frontiers in nutrition, 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.
- Pretreatment CONUT Score and Overall Survival in Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Receiving First-Line Chemotherapy: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) score, combining serum albumin, total cholesterol, and lymphocyte count, has shown promise as a prognostic biomarker in various cancers, but a comprehensive assessment across different cancer types remains lacking. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception to October 2025 and identified 40 meta-analyses reporting 86 outcomes [7 non-statistically significant ( Results: A high CONUT score was suggested to be associated with poor prognosis across multiple cancer types. Among the 79 statistically significant outcomes, pooled HRs ranged from 1.19 to 3.94, RRs from 1.22 to 5.38, and ORs from 1.64 to 4.02. Most included meta-analyses (40%) focused on digestive system tumors. Moderate-quality evidence was identified for 10 outcomes. Notably, a high CONUT score was associated with increased postoperative mortality, with a pooled OR of 4.02 in patients with malignant tumors (MTs) and an RR of 5.38 in those undergoing gastrointestinal and hepatopancreatobiliary (GI-HPB) cancer surgery; both analyses showed no heterogeneity (I Conclusion: The available evidence, predominantly of low or very low quality (76/86 outcomes, 88.4%), suggests elevated CONUT scores are associated with poor prognosis across multiple cancer types. Moderate-quality evidence supports this association in specific contexts-including colorectal cancer, bladder cancer, and postoperative mortality in MTs and GI-HPB surgery-suggesting potential prognostic utility. However, given the overall low quality and substantial heterogeneity, routine clinical use of the CONUT score as an independent decision-making tool is not currently warranted. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier: CRD420261340659.
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.