ArticleBMC cancer2022
Establishing a whole blood CD4
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 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Eosinophils as predictive biomarkers in anti-programmed cell death 1 monotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- The peripheral CD4Translational cancer research · 2024Article
- Peripheral CD4 memory T cells predict the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.Scientific reports · 2023Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBiomarkers that can accurately predict the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) against programmed death 1 (PD-1) ligand in cancer immunotherapy are urgently needed. We have previously reported a novel formula that predicts the response to treatment with second-line nivolumab with high sensitivity and specificity in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) previously treated with chemotherapy. The formula was based on the percentages of CD62L
methodsThe K-index was evaluated using the PBMC method in 59 patients with NSCLC who received first-line pembrolizumab treatment. We also assessed the K-index using the WB method and estimated the correlation between the measurements obtained using both methods in 76 patients with lung cancer.
resultsThis formula consistently predicted the response to first-line pembrolizumab therapy in patients with NSCLC. The WB method correlated well with the PBMC method to obtain %Teff, %Treg, and the formula value. The WB method showed high repeatability (coefficient of variation, < 10%). The data obtained using WB samples collected in tubes containing either heparin or EDTA-2K and stored at room temperature (18-24 °C) for one day after blood sampling did not differ. Additionally, the performance of the WB method was consistent in different flow cytometry instruments.
conclusionsThe K-index successfully predicted the response to first-line therapy with pembrolizumab, as reported earlier for the second-line therapy with nivolumab in patients with NSCLC. The WB method established in this study can replace the cumbersome PBMC method in obtaining the K-index. Overall, this study suggests that the K-index can predict the response to anti-PD-1 therapy in various cancers, including NSCLC.
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.