ArticleMedical sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Comparative Prognostic Performance of CARWL and Naples Prognostic Score in Stage IIIC Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Treated with Definitive Chemoradiotherapy.
Article in Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrognostic stratification remains challenging in patients with stage IIIC non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with definitive chemoradiotherapy (CCRT), and the relative performance of host-related prognostic indices in this setting is unclear. The CARWL (C-reactive Protein, Albumin, and Recent Weight Loss) score and the Naples prognostic score (NPS) have each been proposed as prognostic tools, but direct comparisons are lacking. This study compared their prognostic performance.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 795 patients with stage IIIC NSCLC treated with CCRT between 2010 and 2020. Patients were stratified into three prognostic groups according to CARWL and NPS. Overall survival (OS) was the primary endpoint; progression-free survival (PFS) and locoregional PFS (LRPFS) were secondary endpoints. Survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression.
resultsBoth CARWL and NPS significantly stratified OS, PFS, and LRPFS (all
conclusionsBoth CARWL and NPS offered meaningful prognostic stratification in stage IIIC NSCLC treated with CCRT, but CARWL demonstrated a modest but more consistent prognostic discrimination than NPS. Pending external validation, CARWL represents a practical and biologically grounded tool for risk stratification in this population.
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.