Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33869041›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021

Serum Levels of Soluble Urokinase Plasminogen Activator Receptor Predict Tumor Response and Outcome to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy.

Sven H Loosen, Joao Gorgulho, Markus S Jördens, Maximilian Schulze-Hagen, Fabian Beier, Mihael Vucur, Anne T Schneider, Christiane Koppe, Alexander Mertens, Jakob N Kather and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Soluble Urokinase Plasminogen Activator Receptor Predicts Survival and Hepatic Decompensation in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma.Liver international : official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

15 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Sven H LoosenClinic for Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Medical Faculty of Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Joao GorgulhoDivision of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Hepatobiliary Oncology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Markus S JördensClinic for Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Medical Faculty of Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Maximilian Schulze-HagenDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Fabian BeierDepartment of Medicine IV, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Mihael VucurClinic for Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Medical Faculty of Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Anne T SchneiderDivision of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Hepatobiliary Oncology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Christiane KoppeDivision of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Hepatobiliary Oncology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Alexander MertensClinic for Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Medical Faculty of Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Jakob N KatherDepartment of Medicine III, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Frank TackeDepartment of Hepatology and Gastroenterology, Charité University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Verena KeitelClinic for Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Medical Faculty of Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Tim H BrümmendorfDepartment of Medicine IV, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany.
Christoph RoderburgClinic for Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Medical Faculty of Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Tom LueddeClinic for Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Infectious Diseases, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Medical Faculty of Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany.
RWTH Aachen University · DEDüsseldorf University Hospital · DEHeinrich Heine University Düsseldorf · DECharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DEUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have led to a paradigm shift in cancer therapy, improving outcomes in the treatment of various malignancies. However, not all patients benefit to the same extend from ICI. Reliable tools to predict treatment response and outcome are missing. Soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) is a marker of immune activation, whose levels are prognostic in various cancers. We evaluated circulating suPAR levels as a novel predictive and prognostic biomarker in patients receiving ICI therapy for solid tumors.

methodsA total of n = 87 patients receiving ICI therapy for different solid malignancies as well as 32 healthy controls were included into this study. Serum levels of suPAR were measured by ELISA prior to and sequentially at two time points during ICI therapy.

resultsBaseline suPAR serum levels were significantly higher in solid tumor patients compared to healthy controls. Importantly, patients with low suPAR levels both before or during ICI treatment were more likely to have a favorable response to treatment at three and six months, respectively. This finding was confirmed by multivariate binary logistic regression analysis including several clinicopathological parameters. Moreover, circulating suPAR levels before and during therapy were an independent prognostic factor for overall survival (OS). As such, patients with initial suPAR levels above our ideal prognostic cut-off value (4.86 ng/ml) had a median OS of only 160 days compared to 705 days for patients with suPAR levels below this cut-off value. Finally, low baseline suPAR levels identified a subgroup of patients who experienced ICI-related side effects which in turn were associated with favorable treatment response and outcome.

conclusionOur data suggest that measurements of suPAR serum levels are a previously unknown, easily accessible tool to predict individual treatment response and outcome to ICI therapy. Circulating suPAR might therefore be implemented into stratification algorithms to identify the ideal candidates for ICI treatment.

Indexed as

biomarkercheckpoint inhibitorsimmunotherapyIRAEnivolumabpembrolizumabprognosis

Identifiers

PMID33869041
PMCPMC8047604
OpenAlexW3149189016

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.