ArticleTranslational oncology2017
A Validated Prognostic Biomarker Score for Adult Patients with Nonmetastatic Soft Tissue Sarcomas of the Trunk and Extremities.
Article in Translational oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Prognostic value of pretreatment anemia in patients with soft tissue sarcoma: A meta-analysis.Medicine · 2021Pooled it
- The Prognostic Role of Glasgow Prognostic Score and C-reactive Protein to Albumin Ratio for Sarcoma: A System Review and Meta-Analysis.Disease markers · 2020Pooled it
- Meta-Analysis of Hematological Biomarkers as Reliable Indicators of Soft Tissue Sarcoma Prognosis.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Prognostic value of pretreatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in patients with soft tissue sarcoma: A meta-analysis.Medicine · 2018Pooled it
- Computed tomography-based nutritional associated nomogram on machine learning predicts survival outcomes in patients with resectable soft-tissue sarcoma.World journal of radiology · 2026Article
- Role of high‑sensitivity C‑reactive protein in patients with sarcoma.Oncology letters · 2023Article
- The Prognostic Value of Serum Biomarkers for Survival of Children with Osteosarcoma of the Extremities.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio as a prognostic and potential tumor microenvironment indicator in advanced soft tissue sarcoma treated with first-line doxorubicin therapy.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- The Prognostic Value of the Serum Level of C-Reactive Protein for Survival of Children with Ewing's Sarcoma.Cancers · 2023Article
- Inclusion of Metabolic Tumor Volume in Prognostic Models of Bone and Soft Tissue Sarcoma Increases the Prognostic Value.Cancers · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Prognostic value of neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and other inflammatory markers in patients with high-risk soft tissue sarcomas.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2020Observational
- Analysis of prognostic factors in soft tissue sarcoma: Cancer registry from a single tertiary hospital in Indonesia. A retrospective cohort study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2020Article
- Nomogram based on pre-treatment inflammatory biomarkers predicting survival in patients with head and neck soft tissue sarcoma.Cancer biomarkers : section A of Disease markers · 2020Article
- Chemotherapy improves distant control in localized high-grade soft tissue sarcoma of the extremity/trunk.Clinical sarcoma research · 2020Article
- Prognostic Value of Inflammation Biomarkers for Survival of Patients with Neuroblastoma.Cancer management and research · 2020Article
- Biological significance and prognostic relevance of peripheral blood neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in soft tissue sarcoma.Scientific reports · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe prognostic value of serum biomarkers in soft tissue sarcoma (STS) is limited, and its clinical applicability is compromised by a common inability to adjust for important confounders. The aim of this study was to determine the prognostic value of pretreatment biomarkers on disease-specific survival (DSS) adjusted for confounders.
methodsThe study included 818 patients with localized STS. Pretreatment levels of albumin, C-reactive protein, hemoglobin, neutrophils, and lymphocytes were tested individually and combined in prognostic scores: neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR), Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS), and Aarhus Composite Biomarker Score (ACBS) which includes all five biomarkers. Patients were randomly split into a test cohort and a validation cohort. The prognostic value of biomarkers on DSS was estimated using crude and adjusted Cox proportional hazard models. The different biomarker scores were compared using Akaike's information criteria.
resultsIn the test cohort of 403 patients, all biomarkers except lymphocyte count were significant prognostic factors for DSS also after adjusting for confounders. NLR, GPS, and ACBS were independently associated with decreased survival; however, ACBS was significantly superior to NLR (P=.02) and GPS (P=.002). These findings were validated in the randomly assigned validation cohort of 415 patients. In the pooled data of 818 patients, the ACBS performed better than GPS and NLR. ACBS 2 was independently associated with decreased DSS compared to ACBS 0, hazard ratio 2.3[95% confidence interval: 1.5-3.5], P<.001.
conclusionPatients with abnormal values in more than one serum biomarkers had a significant additional risk of dying compared to patients with only one abnormal value. ACBS was validated as an independent prognostic factor that is superior to both NLR and GPS.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.