Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34722249›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2021

Controlling Nutritional Status Score Before Receiving Treatment as a Prognostic Indicator for Patients With Urothelial Cancer: An Exploration Evaluation Methods.

Lei Peng, Chunxiao Du, Chunyang Meng, Jinze Li, Chengyu You, Xianhui Li, Pan Zhao, Dehong Cao, Yunxiang Li

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. [Comparison of preoperative nutritional scoring systems for predicting survival in upper tract urothelial carcinoma].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Lei PengDepartment of Urology, Nanchong Central Hospital, The Second Clinical College, North Sichuan Medical College (University), Nanchong, China.
Chunxiao DuDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute, Sichuan Cancer Center, School of Medicine, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China.
Chunyang MengDepartment of Urology, Nanchong Central Hospital, The Second Clinical College, North Sichuan Medical College (University), Nanchong, China.
Jinze LiDepartment of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Chengyu YouDepartment of Urology, Nanchong Central Hospital, The Second Clinical College, North Sichuan Medical College (University), Nanchong, China.
Xianhui LiDepartment of Urology, Nanchong Central Hospital, The Second Clinical College, North Sichuan Medical College (University), Nanchong, China.
Pan ZhaoDepartment of Urology, Nanchong Central Hospital, The Second Clinical College, North Sichuan Medical College (University), Nanchong, China.
Dehong CaoDepartment of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yunxiang LiDepartment of Urology, Nanchong Central Hospital, The Second Clinical College, North Sichuan Medical College (University), Nanchong, China.
North Sichuan Medical University · CNNanchong Central Hospital · CNSichuan Cancer Hospital · CNState Key Laboratory of BiotherapyWest China Hospital of Sichuan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThis meta-analysis aims to assess whether the Controlling nutritional status (CONUT) score before treatment can be an independent predictor of the prognosis of patients with urothelial cancer (UC).

methodsThe system searches Web of Science, PubMed, MEDLINE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Cochrane Library, and the search time is up to April 2021. Use STATA 16.0 and Engauge Digitizer 4.1 software for data processing and statistical analysis.

resultsA total of 8 studies were included in this meta-analysis. The meta-analysis results show that compared with the low CONUT group, the high CONUT group has worse over survival (OS) [HR=1.58, 95%CI (1.34, 1.86), P=0.001], cancer-specific survival (CSS) [HR=2.03, 95%CI (1.25-3.29), P=0.04] and recurrence-free survival (RFS) [HR=1.97, 95%CI (1.15, 3.40), P=0.014]; for progression-free survival (PFS), or disease-free survival (DFS), the difference between the two groups was not statistically significant [HR=2.30, 95%CI (0.72, 7.32), P=0.158]. According to different carcinoma types, cut-off value, and region, subgroup analysis of OS was performed, and similar results were obtained.

conclusionsBased on current evidence, this meta-analysis proves that the CONUT score of UC patients before treatment is an independent prognostic predictor. It performs well on OS, CSS, and RFS, but the conclusions on DFS/PFS need to be treated with caution. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021251890, identifier CRD42021251890.

Indexed as

bladder cancercontrolling nutritional statusmeta-analysisprognostic factorsupper tract urothelial carcinomaurothelial cancer

Identifiers

PMID34722249
PMCPMC8548688
OpenAlexW3206926608

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.