SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2026
Association between the HALP score and survival of patients with esophageal or gastro-esophageal junction cancer: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 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
Background: The hemoglobin, albumin, lymphocyte, and platelet (HALP) score is a composite biomarker that reflects the nutritional and inflammatory status. However, the prognostic value of baseline HALP scores in patients with esophageal cancer (EC) or gastro-esophageal junction cancer (GEC) remains incompletely defined. Aim: To systematically evaluate the association between baseline HALP scores and survival outcomes in EC or GEC through a meta-analysis. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for longitudinal observational studies that evaluated the baseline HALP score, and overall survival (OS) and/or progression-free survival (PFS) of EC or GEC patients. Then, the hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) used to compare the low Results: Ten cohort studies that comprised of 1, 953 patients were included. Compared with patients with high HALP scores, patients with low HALP scores had significantly poorer OS (HR: 1.74, 95% CI: 1.53-1.98, Conclusion: Low baseline HALP scores are independently associated with poorer OS and PFS in EC or GEC patients. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO, identifier CRD420261300969.
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.