Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33634507›Full record

ArticleThe oncologist2021

Baseline Modified Glasgow Prognostic Score Associated with Survival in Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma Treated with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

Jacqueline T Brown, Yuan Liu, Julie M Shabto, Dylan J Martini, Deepak Ravindranathan, Emilie Elise Hitron, Greta Anne Russler, Sarah Caulfield, Lauren Beth Yantorni, Shreyas S Joshi and 7 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The oncologist, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  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. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

17 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jacqueline T BrownDepartment of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1885-0906
Yuan LiuWinship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Julie M ShabtoDepartment of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0991-9294
Dylan J MartiniDepartment of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0843-1222
Deepak RavindranathanDepartment of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0364-9027
Emilie Elise HitronDepartment of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6866-977X
Greta Anne RusslerDepartment of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Sarah CaulfieldDepartment of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Lauren Beth YantorniDepartment of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0611-7106
Shreyas S JoshiDepartment of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Haydn KissickDepartment of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7624-5598
Kenneth OganDepartment of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7715-3724
Wayne B HarrisDepartment of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Bradley C CarthonDepartment of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Omer KucukDepartment of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4755-0507
Viraj A MasterDepartment of Urology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7251-142X
Mehmet Asim BilenDepartment of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Emory University · US

Funding

Winship Cancer Institute Cancer Center Support GrantP30CA138292 · NCI · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI Suresh S Ramalingam · 2009 to 2026
$47.5M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA138292
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe modified Glasgow prognostic score (mGPS), a clinical tool that incorporates albumin and C-reactive protein, has proven useful in the prognostication of multiple cancers. Several immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been approved for the treatment of metastatic urothelial cell carcinoma (mUC), but a prognostic biomarker is needed. We investigated the impact of mGPS on survival outcomes in patients with mUC receiving ICIs. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe retrospectively reviewed patients with mUC treated with ICIs (programmed cell death protein 1 or programmed cell death ligand 1 inhibitors) at Winship Cancer Institute from 2015 to 2018. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were measured from the start date of ICI until death or clinical or radiographic progression, respectively. mGPS was defined as a summary score with one point given for C-reactive protein >10 mg/L and/or albumin <3.5 g/dL. Univariate (UVA) and multivariate (MVA) analyses were carried out using Cox proportional hazard model. These outcomes were also assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis.

resultsA total of 53 patients were included with a median follow-up 27.1 months. The median age was 70 years, with 84.9% male and 20.8% Black. Baseline mGPS was 0 in 43.4%, 1 in 28.3% and 2 in 28.3%. Increased mGPS at the time of ICI initiation was associated with poorer OS and PFS in UVA, MVA, and Kaplan-Meier analyses.

conclusionThe mGPS may be a useful prognostic tool in patients with mUC when treatment with ICI is under consideration. These results warrant a larger study for validation. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The ideal prognostic tool for use in a busy clinical practice is easy-to-use, cost-effective, and capable of accurately predicting clinical outcomes. There is currently no universally accepted risk score in metastatic urothelial cell carcinoma (mUC), particularly in the immunotherapy era. The modified Glasgow prognostic score (mGPS) incorporates albumin and C-reactive protein and may reflect underlying chronic inflammation, a known risk factor for resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). This study found that baseline mGPS is associated with survival outcomes in patients with mUC treated with ICIs and may help clinicians to prognosticate for their patients beginning immunotherapy.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Transitional CellUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsAgedFemaleHumansImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsMalePrognosisRetrospective StudiesImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsCheckpoint inhibitorsGlasgow prognostic scoreImmunotherapyInflammationUrothelial cell carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID33634507
PMCPMC8100543
OpenAlexW3131288861

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.