ArticleSisli Etfal Hastanesi tip bulteni2025
Which Nutritional Scoring System Best Predicts Transplant Outcomes in Allogeneic Stem Cell Recipients? A Comparison of Nutritional Risk Index, Prognostic Nutritional Index, and Controlling Nutritional Status.
Article in Sisli Etfal Hastanesi tip bulteni, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association between the prognostic nutritional index and early mortality of AML patients after allogeneic HSCT: a retrospective cohort analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Association between prognostic nutritional index and prognosis in acute graft-versus-host disease following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Nutritional status significantly impacts outcomes in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). Among various indices, the Nutritional Risk Index (NRI), Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI), and Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) scores hold potential as prognostic tools. This study compares their predictive utility for transplant outcomes. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 41 patients who underwent their first allo-HSCT between October 2022 and July 2024. Nutritional scores were calculated using pre-transplant data, and their associations with mortality and non-relapse mortality (NRM) were assessed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and multivariable logistic regression were employed to evaluate predictive accuracy. Results: The high CONUT score demonstrated the highest prognostic accuracy for mortality (AUC: 0.771, p=0.026) and NRM (AUC: 0.806, p=0.047). It was the sole independent predictor of mortality (OR: 2.180, p=0.028). Both the NRI (AUC: 0.737, p=0.040) and PNI (AUC: 0.803, p=0.008) were also associated with mortality but lacked independent predictive value. Higher CONUT scores correlated with increased mortality rates. Conclusion: The CONUT score emerged as the most effective nutritional scoring system for predicting mortality in allo-HSCT patients. Its simplicity and integration of key clinical parameters make it a valuable tool for early risk stratification and targeted interventions. Further studies with larger cohorts are warranted to validate these findings and refine nutritional management strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.