ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Significance of the geriatric nutritional risk index and body composition as prognostic indicators in gastric cancer patients.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A poor prognosis in patients with gastric cancer (GC) is independently linked to malnutrition and CT-defined low muscle mass. However, the combined effects on prognosis outcomes are not fully elucidated. This study systematically evaluated the synergistic effects of body composition parameters and nutritional indicators in predicting the prognosis of gastric cancer. Methods: This retrospective study included 986 middle-aged and elderly patients with stage II/III GC who underwent surgical resection. Body composition parameters, including the skeletal muscle index (SMI), skeletal muscle density (SMD), and various adipose tissue indices, were evaluated by a single cross-sectional computed tomography image at the L3 level. The combined indices were defined as the product of the geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI) and body composition parameters. Prognostic analyses were conducted using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: The 986 patients were divided into a training cohort (n = 690) and a validation cohort (n = 296) at a 7:3 ratio. The median (interquartile) age was 71 (67-75) years, and 623 (63.2%) patients were male. In the training cohort, the median values of the SMI, SMD, adipose tissue parameters, and their combinations with the GNRI differed significantly by sex. Patients were classified into sex-specific quartiles (Q1-Q4) on the basis of SMI × GNRI score. Both overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were significantly different across these quartiles (P < 0.001). Although all body composition parameters and their combinations with the GNRI were independent predictors of OS and DFS according to multivariate analysis, the combination of the SMI × GNRI demonstrated superior prognostic performance compared with other indices in the prediction of OS (c-statistics: 0.749, AICc: 3842.9) and DFS (c-statistics: 0.731, AICc: 4174.7). These results remained consistent across the stratified analyses. The validation cohort confirmed that the SMI × GNRI exhibited greater predictive and discriminative power than the other indices did. Conclusions: A robust and readily applicable tool for prognostic assessment, the SMI×GNRI index effectively predicts survival outcomes in middle-aged and elderly stage II/III GC patients. Further prospective studies are needed to validate its effectiveness across diverse populations and clinical settings.
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.