ArticleiScience2026
Lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio predicts survival in localized osteosarcoma in Vietnamese patients.
Article in iScience, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inflammatory markers such as the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR), alongside hemoglobin (Hgb) levels, have been proposed as prognostic tools in osteosarcoma, though their reliability remains unclear. We retrospectively evaluated the prognostic significance of these pre-operative markers in a cohort of 100 Vietnamese patients with stage IB-IIB osteosarcoma, specifically focusing on the post-neoadjuvant, pre-operative window, a clinically critical yet underexplored time frame. In the primary dichotomized multivariable analysis, LMR emerged as an independent predictor of poor overall survival, whereas PLR showed only univariable associations, and NLR and Hgb were not statistically significant. While LMR demonstrated robust prognostic value for overall survival, it failed to predict disease progression within 24 months. To address cutpoint bias, sensitivity analyses modeling these markers as continuous variables combined with internal bootstrap validation (1000 resamples) confirmed parameter stability only for LMR, but not PLR and NLR. Reflecting these continuous trends, the final multivariable model achieved an apparent C-index of 0.729, which adjusted to an optimism-corrected C-index of 0.628. External literature-derived median cutoffs did not show significant associations when applied to this post-neoadjuvant cohort, highlighting key population- and timing-specific limitations. Although these peripheral blood markers demonstrate prognostic potential, our findings remain exploratory, and validation in independent multi-center cohorts with longitudinal prospective evaluation is required before their clinical utility can be established.
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.