Non-Cochrane · prognostic · PM41402518

​Hematological parameters as predictors of oral cancer prognosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Alshahrani Abdullah M, Kaur Kanwalpreet, Saini Ravinder S, et al. · Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2025 · PubMed · doi:10.1007/s00432-025-06394-5

Findings

24 findings

Population
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR)Low pre-treatment NLROverall survival
Multivariate-adjusted studies only
HR 1.45 [1.20, 1.75]
GRADE not reported
10 studies
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR)Low pre-treatment NLRDisease-free survivalHR 1.66 [1.31, 2.10]
65% vs 50%
GRADE not reported
12 studies · 3100 participants
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR)Low pre-treatment NLROverall survival
Leave-one-out (lowest HR study excluded)
HR 1.60 [1.35, 1.95]
GRADE not reported
14 studies
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR)Low pre-treatment NLROverall survivalHR 1.59 [1.32, 1.92]
70% vs 55%
Moderate
Downgraded: inconsistency
15 studies · 4180 participants
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR)Low pre-treatment NLROverall survival
NLR cut-off > 3.0
HR 1.45 [1.20, 1.70]
GRADE not reported
7 studies
Patients with pathologically confirmed oral squamous cell carcinomaHigh pre-treatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR)Low pre-treatment NLROverall survival
Figure 2 panel a forest plot pooled diamond
Unresolved: the two extractors disagree on this row.
HR 1.90 [1.65, 2.18]
GRADE not reported
15 studies
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR)Low pre-treatment NLRDisease-specific survivalHR 1.50 [1.10, 2.05]
GRADE not reported
5 studies
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR)Low pre-treatment NLROverall survival
Excluding low-quality studies (NOS <= 5)
HR 1.55 [1.25, 1.90]
GRADE not reported
8 studies
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR)Low pre-treatment NLROverall survival
NLR cut-off <= 3.0
HR 1.70 [1.35, 2.05]
GRADE not reported
8 studies
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR)Low pre-treatment NLROverall survival
Leave-one-out (highest HR study excluded)
HR 1.57 [1.30, 1.85]
GRADE not reported
14 studies
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR)Low pre-treatment NLRNodal metastasis at diagnosis
Unresolved: the two extractors disagree on this row.
OR 1.61 [1.30, 1.98]
42% vs 55%
Low
Downgraded: imprecision
7 studies · 1200 participants
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR)Low pre-treatment PLROverall survival
PLR cut-off <= 150
HR 1.70 [1.35, 2.05]
GRADE not reported
9 studies
Patients with pathologically confirmed oral squamous cell carcinomaHigh pre-treatment platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR)Low pre-treatment PLROverall survival
Figure 2 panel b forest plot pooled diamond
Unresolved: the two extractors disagree on this row.
HR 1.68 [1.42, 2.00]
GRADE not reported
15 studies
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR)Low pre-treatment PLROverall survival
PLR cut-off > 150
HR 1.40 [1.15, 1.65]
GRADE not reported
10 studies
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR)Low pre-treatment PLROverall survival
Excluding low-quality studies (NOS <= 5)
HR 1.52
GRADE not reported
Studies not reported
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR)Low pre-treatment PLRDisease-free survival
Unresolved: the two extractors disagree on this row.
HR 1.50 [1.18, 1.90]
60% vs 48%
Low
Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency
9 studies · 2300 participants
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR)Low pre-treatment PLROverall survival
Unresolved: the two extractors disagree on this row.
HR 1.58 [1.29, 1.94]
65% vs 50%
Low
Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency
19 studies · 5714 participants
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR)Low pre-treatment PLROverall survival
Trim-and-fill adjusted (2 studies imputed)
HR 1.45 [1.18, 1.78]
GRADE not reported
Studies not reported
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment NLR or PLR (marker not specified)Low pre-treatment NLR or PLRSurvival (outcome not specified)
Surgery only
HR 1.55 [1.20, 1.90]
GRADE not reported
8 studies
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment NLR or PLR (marker not specified)Low pre-treatment NLR or PLRSurvival (outcome not specified)
Asian studies
HR 1.65 [1.30, 2.00]
GRADE not reported
10 studies
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment NLR or PLR (marker not specified)Low pre-treatment NLR or PLRSurvival (outcome not specified)
Sample size > 200 patients
HR 1.45 [1.15, 1.75]
GRADE not reported
7 studies
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment NLR or PLR (marker not specified)Low pre-treatment NLR or PLRSurvival (outcome not specified)
Mixed or CRT treatment
HR 1.65 [1.30, 2.00]
GRADE not reported
7 studies
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment NLR or PLR (marker not specified)Low pre-treatment NLR or PLRSurvival (outcome not specified)
Sample size <= 200 patients
HR 1.70 [1.40, 2.00]
GRADE not reported
8 studies
Patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC)High pre-treatment NLR or PLR (marker not specified)Low pre-treatment NLR or PLRSurvival (outcome not specified)
Non-Asian studies
HR 1.50 [1.20, 1.80]
GRADE not reported
5 studies

Included primary studies 27

Open in Studies
StudyYearAlso included byOutcomes it informs hereTrial data
Nakashima 2016
matched by author and year (probable)
NR1 other reviewnot statednot extracted yet
Perisanidis 2013
matched by author and year (probable)
NR1 other reviewnot statednot extracted yet
Ruiz-Ranz 2022
matched by author and year (probable)
NR1 other reviewnot statednot extracted yet
Sano 2018
matched by author and year (probable)
NR1 other reviewnot statednot extracted yet
Tazeen 2020
matched by author and year (probable)
NR1 other reviewnot statednot extracted yet
Trevisani 2023
matched by author and year (probable)
NR1 other reviewnot statednot extracted yet
Tsai 2022
matched by author and year (probable)
NR1 other reviewnot statednot extracted yet
Watabe 2021
matched by author and year (probable)
NR1 other reviewnot statednot extracted yet
Zakaria 2022
matched by author and year (probable)
NR1 other reviewnot statednot extracted yet
Chen 2017
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Demir and Abuzaid 2022
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Diana 2023
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Huang CH 2021
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Kao (Chang) 2018
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Khazravi 2022
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Mishra 2021
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Ning 2021
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Ozturk 2016
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Park 2016
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Park 2017
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Takahashi 2019
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Valero 2020
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Wongrakpanich 2016
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Yang 2018
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Zhilin 2021
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Zhuang 2022
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet
Zubair 2022
matched by author and year (probable)
NRthis review onlynot statednot extracted yet

Overlap with other reviews

Reviews that include the same primary studies are not independent evidence. Shared counts match studies by PMID, DOI or NCT, and otherwise by author and year (a probable match). Only the non-Cochrane dental reviews have study lists, so overlap with Cochrane reviews is not counted yet.

Review question

ElementPlanned (methods)Found (results)
PopulationPatients with pathologically confirmed oral squamous cell carcinoma (oral cavity and tongue), any stage and treatmentOSCC patients, about 7940 across 35 studies (n=35)
InterventionHigh pre-treatment NLR, PLR or MPV (cut-offs as defined by each study)High NLR (n=15 for OS); high PLR (n=19 for OS); high MPV (n=3, not pooled)
ComparisonLow pre-treatment NLR, PLR or MPVLow NLR, PLR or MPV
OutcomesOverall survival, disease-free survival; disease-specific survival, recurrence, nodal metastasis and other clinicopathological factorsOS (NLR n=15, PLR n=19); DFS (NLR n=12, PLR n=9); DSS (NLR n=5); nodal metastasis (NLR n=7)
Study designsObservational studies (retrospective or prospective cohorts, case-control); English language35 observational studies, 33 retrospective cohorts and 2 earlier meta-analyses (n=35); 30 in meta-analysis
TimingPublished 2000 to April 2025Not specified