ArticleThe clinical respiratory journal2023
Development and validation of the CAIL prognostic score in non-small cell lung cancer patients with malignant pleural effusion.
Article in The clinical respiratory journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- External validation of the LENT and PROMISE prognostic scores for malignant pleural effusion.ERJ open research · 2025Article
- Comparison of five scores to predict mortality in malignant pleural effusion.Updates in surgery · 2024Article
- Development and validation of the CAIL prognostic score in non-small cell lung cancer patients with malignant pleural effusion.The clinical respiratory journal · 2023Article
- Evaluation of prognostic scores and factors affecting survival in patients with malignant pleural effusion.Annals of thoracic medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatients with malignant pleural effusion (MPE) typically have poor prognoses, and predicting survival is challenging. The present study aimed to identify prognostic factors of overall survival (OS) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with MPE in the time of immunotherapy and targeted therapy.
methodsData of 344 consecutive NSCLC patients with MPE on clinical, radiological, and molecular characteristics and treatment options were collected. The risk factors in the training cohort were assessed using univariate and multivariate proportional hazards analyses. A clinical prognostic score was established and validated.
resultsAccording to the results of the multivariable survival analysis, the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score (PS), antiangiogenic therapy, immunotherapy, and lactic dehydrogenase (LDH) in pleural fluid (CAIL) prognostic score was developed (n = 275) and subsequently validated (n = 69). Patients who underwent risk stratification into low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups had median OS of 46.1, 23.1, and 9.6 months, respectively (P < 0.0001). The area under the curve (AUC) analysis showed the CAIL score to be superior at predicting survival compared with the LENT score at 6 (0.84 vs. 0.77, P < 0.01), 12 (0.87 vs. 0.82, P < 0.01), and 36 months (0.80 vs. 0.77, P < 0.01).
conclusionsFor NSCLC patients with MPE, the validated CAIL prognostic score integrates clinical characteristics and therapeutic modalities to predict survival.
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.