Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29031130›Full record

ArticleTranslational oncology2017

A Validated Prognostic Biomarker Score for Adult Patients with Nonmetastatic Soft Tissue Sarcomas of the Trunk and Extremities.

Katja Maretty-Kongstad, Ninna Aggerholm-Pedersen, Johnny Keller, Akmal Safwat

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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 · 2020
    Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Katja Maretty-KongstadSarcoma Centre of Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark; Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark.
Ninna Aggerholm-PedersenSarcoma Centre of Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark; Department of Experimental Clinical Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark; Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark. Electronic address: ninnpe@rm.dk.
Johnny KellerSarcoma Centre of Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark.
Akmal SafwatSarcoma Centre of Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark; Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

PMID29031130
PMCPMC5643061

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.