Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35027001›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2022

Inflammation-scores as prognostic markers of overall survival in lung cancer: a register-based study of 6,210 Danish lung cancer patients.

Anne Winther-Larsen, Ninna Aggerholm-Pedersen, Birgitte Sandfeld-Paulsen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Prognostic stratification using the Aarhus Composite Biomarker Score in recurrent and metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Anne Winther-LarsenDepartment of Clinical Biochemistry, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Ninna Aggerholm-PedersenDepartment of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Birgitte Sandfeld-PaulsenDepartment of Clinical Biochemistry, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark. birgne@rm.dk.
Aarhus University Hospital · DKRegionshospitalet Viborg · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInflammation-scores based on general inflammation markers are suggested as prognostic markers of overall survival (OS) in lung cancer. However, whether these inflammation-scores improves the prognostication performed by well-established prognostic markers is unsettled. In a large register-based lung cancer patient cohort, nine different inflammation-scores were compared, and their ability to optimize the prognostication of OS was evaluated.

methodsLung cancer patients diagnosed from 2009-2018 in The Central Denmark Region were identified in the Danish Lung Cancer Registry. Pre-treatment inflammation markers were extracted from the clinical laboratory information system. Prognostication of OS was evaluated by Cox proportional hazard models. Comparison of the inflammation-scores and their added value to established prognostic markers were assessed by Akaike's information criteria and Harrel's C-index.

resultsIn total, 5,320 patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and 890 patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) were identified. In NSCLC, the Aarhus composite biomarker score (ACBS), including albumin, C-reactive protein, neutrophil count, lymphocyte count and haemoglobin, and the neutrophil-lymphocyte-ratio (NLR) were superior. Furthermore, they improved the prognostication of OS significantly (p <0.0001) (ACBS: HR: 2.24 (95%CI: 1.97-2.54); NLR: HR: 1.58 (95%CI: 1.47 - 1.69)). In SCLC, three scores were equally superior and improved the prognostication of OS p < 0.0001): neutrophil-lymphocyte-ratio (HR:1.62 (95%CI: 1.38-1.90)), modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS) (HR:1.70 (95%CI: 1.55-1.86) and the Combined NLR and GPS (CNG) (HR:2.10 (95%CI: 1.77-2.49).

conclusionsThe ACBS was the optimal score in NSCLC, whereas neutrophil-lymphocyte-ratio, mGPS and CNG were equally superior in SCLC. Additionally, these inflammation-scores all optimised the prognostication of OS and added value to well-established prognostic markers.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorLeukocyte CountLung NeoplasmsAgedAged, 80 and overDenmarkFemaleHumansInflammationMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingBiomarkers, TumorAarhus Composite Biomarker Score (ACBS)Combined NLR and GPS (CNG)Inflammation-scoreLung cancerModified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS)Neutrocyte-lymphocyte-raio (NLR)

Identifiers

PMID35027001
PMCPMC8759208
OpenAlexW4205786321

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.