Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34101038›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical oncology2021

On-treatment C-reactive protein control could predict response to subsequent anti-PD-1 treatment in metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

Kimiharu Takamatsu, Ryuichi Mizuno, Yuto Baba, Yota Yasumizu, Nobuyuki Tanaka, Suguru Shirotake, Toshikazu Takeda, Shinya Morita, Kazuhiro Matsumoto, Takeo Kosaka and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 41% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kimiharu TakamatsuDepartment of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi 35, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 1608582, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3325-6606
Ryuichi MizunoDepartment of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi 35, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 1608582, Japan. mizunor@z7.keio.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1507-1421
Yuto BabaDepartment of Uro-Oncology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Saitama, Japan.
Yota YasumizuDepartment of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi 35, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 1608582, Japan.
Nobuyuki TanakaDepartment of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi 35, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 1608582, Japan.
Suguru ShirotakeDepartment of Uro-Oncology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Saitama, Japan.
Toshikazu TakedaDepartment of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi 35, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 1608582, Japan.
Shinya MoritaDepartment of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi 35, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 1608582, Japan.
Kazuhiro MatsumotoDepartment of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi 35, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 1608582, Japan.
Takeo KosakaDepartment of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi 35, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 1608582, Japan.
Hiroshi AsanumaDepartment of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi 35, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 1608582, Japan.
Masafumi OyamaDepartment of Uro-Oncology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, Saitama, Japan.
Shuji MikamiDivision of Diagnostic Pathology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Mototsugu OyaDepartment of Urology, Keio University School of Medicine, Shinanomachi 35, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 1608582, Japan.
Keio University · JPSaitama Medical University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical significance of the on-treatment C-reactive protein (CRP) status during systemic treatment as the predictive marker for the response of subsequent nivolumab monotherapy in patients with refractory metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). PATIENTS AND

methodsA total of 73 mRCC patients treated with nivolumab were retrospectively reviewed. We evaluated the serum CRP levels before and after molecular-targeted treatments. Patients whose CRP did not exceed baseline value were defined as the CRP-control group and the others were defined as the CRP-progression group. The clinical impact of CRP-control on the efficacy of nivolumab was assessed.

resultsTwenty-four patients (33%) were categorized into the CRP-control group. The CRP-control group patients (median PFS not reached) had significantly longer PFS than the CRP-progression group (median PFS 11.9 months, 95% confidence interval, CI 4.1-19.8, p = 0.038). The CRP-control group had a tendency of longer OS from nivolumab initiation than the CRP-progression group (p = 0.071). By multivariate analysis, the on-treatment CRP-control was the independent predictive factor for PFS (hazard ratio HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.14-0.99, p = 0.047).

conclusionThe on-treatment CRP-control could be the predictive factor for the efficacy of nivolumab in refractory mRCC patients.

Indexed as

BiomarkerC-reactive proteinMetastasisNivolumabRenal cell carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID34101038
OpenAlexW3168396117

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.