SynthesisBMC oral health2026
Prognostic value of NLR versus PLR and LMR in patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2026. 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.
- Prognostic Disparities in Multiple versus Single Primary OSCC: A Large-Cohort Analysis and Predictive Modelling.International dental journal · 2026Article
- Clinical Significance of Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio and Lymphocyte-to-Monocyte Ratio in Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe prognostic value of inflammatory biomarkers like neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), and lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) in oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) requires further validation. This updated meta-analysis evaluates the impact of these biomarkers on OSCC survival and aims to identify the most effective indicator. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science until February 1, 2026. Hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were analyzed using random- or fixed-effects models. Evidence stability was assessed through cumulative meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis (TSA), while restricted mean survival time (RMST) analysis measured survival differences between NLR subgroups. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine heterogeneity and robustness.
resultsOut of 1,193 articles, 35 retrospective studies involving 12,225 OSCC patients were included. High pretreatment NLR was significantly associated to poorer OS (HR = 1.61) and DFS (HR = 1.64), confirmed by sufficient cumulative information size in TSA. While high PLR was associated with poor OS, the results showed marked heterogeneity and instability. LMR did not reach statistical significance for OS, confirmed by sufficient evidence in TSA.
conclusionsCurrent evidence suggests that NLR is a robust prognostic biomarker for OSCC. Given the observational nature of the included studies, future prospective studies are necessary to validate these findings and establish standardized NLR thresholds to guide risk stratification and personalized management.
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.