Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37968545›Full record

ArticleDiscover oncology2023

Geriatric nutritional risk index as a prognostic marker of first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor combination therapy in patients with renal cell carcinoma: a retrospective multi-center study.

Shogo Watari, Satoshi Katayama, Hiromasa Shiraishi, Moto Tokunaga, Risa Kubota, Norihiro Kusumi, Takaharu Ichikawa, Tomoyasu Tsushima, Yasuyuki Kobayashi, Kensuke Bekku and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Discover oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Shogo WatariDepartment of Urology, National Hospital Organization Okayama Medical Center, 1711-1 Tamasu, Kita-Ku, Okayama, 701-1192, Japan. sg.watari@gmail.com.
Satoshi KatayamaDepartment of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, 2-5-1 Shikata-Cho, Kita-Ku, Okayama, 700-8558, Japan.
Hiromasa ShiraishiDepartment of Urology, National Hospital Organization Okayama Medical Center, 1711-1 Tamasu, Kita-Ku, Okayama, 701-1192, Japan.
Moto TokunagaDepartment of Urology, National Hospital Organization Okayama Medical Center, 1711-1 Tamasu, Kita-Ku, Okayama, 701-1192, Japan.
Risa KubotaDepartment of Urology, National Hospital Organization Okayama Medical Center, 1711-1 Tamasu, Kita-Ku, Okayama, 701-1192, Japan.
Norihiro KusumiDepartment of Urology, National Hospital Organization Okayama Medical Center, 1711-1 Tamasu, Kita-Ku, Okayama, 701-1192, Japan.
Takaharu IchikawaDepartment of Urology, National Hospital Organization Okayama Medical Center, 1711-1 Tamasu, Kita-Ku, Okayama, 701-1192, Japan.
Tomoyasu TsushimaDepartment of Urology, National Hospital Organization Okayama Medical Center, 1711-1 Tamasu, Kita-Ku, Okayama, 701-1192, Japan.
Yasuyuki KobayashiDepartment of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, 2-5-1 Shikata-Cho, Kita-Ku, Okayama, 700-8558, Japan.
Kensuke BekkuDepartment of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, 2-5-1 Shikata-Cho, Kita-Ku, Okayama, 700-8558, Japan. gmd421030@s.okayama-u.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0002-1592
Motoo ArakiDepartment of Urology, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences, 2-5-1 Shikata-Cho, Kita-Ku, Okayama, 700-8558, Japan.
National Hospital Organization · JPOkayama University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) in predicting the efficacy of first-line immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combination therapy for metastatic or unresectable renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and associated patient prognosis.

methodsA retrospective study was conducted using data from 19 institutions. The GNRI was calculated using body mass index and serum albumin level, and patients were classified into two groups using the GNRI values, with 98 set as the cutoff point.

resultsIn all, 119 patients with clear cell RCC who received first-line drug therapy with ICIs were analyzed. Patients with GNRI ≥ 98 had significantly better overall survival (OS) (p = 0.008) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) (p = 0.001) rates than those with GNRI < 98; however, progression-free survival (PFS) did not differ significantly. Inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis showed that low GNRI scores were significantly associated with poor OS (p = 0.004) and CSS (p = 0.015). Multivariate analysis showed that the Karnofsky performance status (KPS) score was a better predictor of prognosis (OS; HR 5.17, p < 0.001, CSS; HR 4.82, p = 0.003) than GNRI (OS; HR 0.36, p = 0.066, CSS; HR 0.35, p = 0.072). In a subgroup analysis of patients with a good KPS and GNRI ≥ 98 vs < 98, the 2-year OS rates were 91.4% vs 66.9% (p = 0.068), 2-year CSS rates were 91.4% vs 70.1% (p = 0.073), and PFS rates were 39.7% vs 21.4 (p = 0.27), respectively.

conclusionThe prognostic efficiency of GNRI was inferior to that of the KPS score at the initiation of the first-line ICI combination therapy for clear cell RCC.

Indexed as

Geriatric Nutritional Risk IndexImmune checkpoint inhibitorPrognosisRenal cell carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID37968545
PMCPMC10651608
OpenAlexW4388727050

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.