4.6 Article

Prognostic role of the prognostic nutritional index (PNI) in patients with head and neck neoplasms undergoing radiotherapy: A meta-analysis

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 16, Issue 9, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0257425

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this meta-analysis, it was found that lower pretreatment PNI was significantly associated with worse overall survival, distant metastasis-free survival, and progression-free survival in patients with head and neck neoplasms undergoing radiotherapy.
Background This novel meta-analysis was conducted to systematically and comprehensively evaluate the prognostic role of the pretreatment PNI in patients with head and neck neoplasms (HNNs) undergoing radiotherapy. Methods Three databases, PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science, were used to retrieve desired literature. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted and pooled by fixed-effects or random-effects models to analyze the relationship between the PNI and survival outcomes: overall survival (OS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and progression-free survival (PFS). Results Ten eligible studies involving 3,458 HNN patients were included in our analysis. The robustness of the pooled results was ensured by heterogeneity tests (I-2 = 22.6%, 0.0%, and 0.0% for OS, DMFS, and PFS, respectively). The fixed-effects model revealed a lower pretreatment PNI was significantly related to a worse OS (HR = 1.974; 95% CI: 1.642-2.373; P<0.001), DMFS (HR = 1.959; 95% CI: 1.599-2.401; P<0.001), and PFS (HR = 1.498; 95% CI: 1.219-1.842; P<0.001). The trim-and-fill method (HR = 1.877; 95% CI: 1.361-2.589) was also used to prove that the existing publication bias did not deteriorate the reliability of the relationship. Conclusion The pretreatment PNI is a promising indicator to evaluate and predict the long-term prognostic survival outcomes in HNN patients undergoing radiotherapy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available