Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30151899›Full record

SynthesisThoracic cancer2018

Pretreatment hematological markers predict clinical outcome in cancer patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors: A meta-analysis.

Qiaoyun Tan, Shuxia Liu, Caixia Liang, Xiaohong Han, Yuankai Shi

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Thoracic cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 7 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Qiaoyun TanDepartment of Medical Oncology, Beijing Key Laboratory of Clinical Study on Anticancer Molecular Targeted Drugs, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Shuxia LiuDepartment of Clinical Laboratory, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Caixia LiangDepartment of Medical Oncology, Beijing Key Laboratory of Clinical Study on Anticancer Molecular Targeted Drugs, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Xiaohong HanDepartment of Medical Oncology, Beijing Key Laboratory of Clinical Study on Anticancer Molecular Targeted Drugs, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Yuankai ShiDepartment of Medical Oncology, Beijing Key Laboratory of Clinical Study on Anticancer Molecular Targeted Drugs, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized the clinical treatment of multiple cancers. Recent studies revealed the potential prognostic value of the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR) in patients receiving ICIs; however, the results were inconsistent. We conducted a meta-analysis to identify the prognostic significance of baseline NLR and PLR in cancer patients treated with ICIs.

methodsWe conducted a thorough literature search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for studies dealing with the prognostic impact of pretreatment NLR and/or PLR levels in cancer patients treated with ICIs. The clinical outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated, and sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed to investigate heterogeneity.

resultsSeventeen articles involving 2092 patients were included in the final analysis. The pooled HRs of PFS and OS for NLR were 1.81(95% CI 1.36-2.41) and 2.26 (95% CI 1.68-3.03), respectively, suggesting that patients with higher baseline NLRs had significantly poorer PFS and OS. Similar results were detected in sensitivity and subgroup analyses. However, no significant relevance was found between PLR and clinical endpoints in patients treated with ICIs (HR = 1.14, 95% CI 0.88-1.48 for PFS; HR = 1.35, 95% CI 0.86-2.12 for OS).

conclusionThese results indicate that high pretreatment NLR but not PLR level, as a routinely obtained hematological parameter, is a potential prognostic predictor for poor PFS and OS in cancer patients receiving ICIs.

Indexed as

BiomarkersHumansNeoplasmsPrognosisBiomarkersCancerimmune checkpoint inhibitormarkerneutrophil to lymphocyte ratioplatelet to lymphocyte ratio

Identifiers

PMID30151899
PMCPMC6166061

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.