Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35702873›Full record

SynthesisCancer medicine2023

A comprehensive analysis of Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS)/the modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS) on immune checkpoint inhibitor efficacy among patients with advanced cancer.

Yongchao Zhang, Shanshan Chen, Hualei Chen, Wei Li

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

Synthesis in Cancer medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. The association between an inflammation-based nutritional tool (Glasgow Prognostic Score) and length of hospital stay in patients with haematological cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  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

4 authors.

Yongchao ZhangCancer Center, Beijing Ditan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Shanshan ChenCancer Center, Beijing Ditan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Hualei ChenCancer Center, Beijing Ditan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Wei LiCancer Center, Beijing Ditan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0002-9991-7892

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe association between Glasgow Prognostic Score (GPS) and the modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS) and clinical outcomes in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) remains controversial. Thus, this meta-analysis aimed to examine the prognostic performance of GPS and mGPS in patients treated with ICIs.

methodsEligible studies were retrieved from searches of EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library until July 2021. The hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled by using fixed-effect or random-effects model to evaluate the influence of GPS/mGPS on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).

resultsA total of 1164 patients were included. Overall, mGPS score of 2 and 1 were related to inferior OS (p < 0.001) and PFS (p < 0.001). Subgroup analyses showed no significant association between mGPS score of 1 and OS in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), while this score was significantly associated with poor PFS in patients with NSCLC and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Higher GPS (score of 1 or 2) were associated with poor clinical outcomes (OS: p < 0.001; PFS: p = 0.036). Subgroup analysis showed high GPS levels were linked to worse OS in patients with NSCLC and gastric cancer, but not for PFS in these patients. Regarding test time point, GPS was related to worse OS and PFS in pre-treatment GPS group, but not in post-treatment GPS group.

conclusionGPS and mGPS showed great potential to predict survival in patients treated with ICIs. Large and perspective trial are warranted to further validate these findings.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungLung NeoplasmsHumansImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsPrognosisProportional Hazards ModelsImmune Checkpoint Inhibitorscancerglasgow prognostic scoreimmune checkpoint inhibitorsmeta-analysismodified Glasgow prognostic score

Identifiers

PMID35702873
PMCPMC9844653

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.