ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Prognostic Utility of the Modified Glasgow Prognostic Score in Urothelial Carcinoma: Outcomes from a Pooled Analysis.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prognostic Impact of Pre-Treatment Modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS) on Survival in Patients with Advanced-Stage Ovarian Cancer.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Simple biomarkers based on CRP and albumin predict clinical outcomes in adult patients with T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Prognostic values of systemic inflammation and nutrition-based prognostic indices in oropharyngeal carcinoma.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Many studies explored the prognostic value of the modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS) in urothelial carcinoma (UC), but the results are controversial. This study aimed to quantify the relationship between pretreatment mGPS and survival in patients with UC. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted using Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science to identify eligible studies published before August 2022. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to assess the association between pretreatment mGPS and the prognosis of UC. Results: Thirteen eligible studies involving 12,524 patients were included. A high mGPS was significantly associated with poor overall survival (mGPS 1/0: HR = 1.33, 95% CI 1.12−1.58, p = 0.001; mGPS 2/0: HR = 2.02, 95% CI 1.43−2.84, p < 0.0001), progression-free survival (mGPS 1/0: HR = 1.26, 95% CI 1.03−1.53, p = 0.021; mGPS 2/0: HR = 1.76, 95% CI 1.12−2.77, p = 0.013), recurrence-free survival (mGPS 1/0: HR = 1.36, 95% CI 1.18−1.56, p < 0.0001; mGPS 2/0: HR = 1.70, 95% CI 1.44−2.000, p < 0.0001), and cancer-specific survival (mGPS 2/0: HR = 1.81, 95% CI 1.30−2.52, p < 0.0001). A subgroup analysis of OS also yielded similar results. Conclusions: Evidence suggests that high pretreatment mGPS in UC is closely related to poor survival. Pre-treatment mGPS is a powerful independent prognostic factor in patients with UC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.