ArticleFrontiers in immunology2024
Association of the Scottish inflammatory prognostic score with treatment-related adverse events and prognosis in esophageal cancer receiving neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy.
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2024. 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 value of the Scottish Inflammatory Prognostic Score in advanced NSCLC treated with second-line nivolumab.Discover oncology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of serum alkaline phosphatase and lactate dehydrogenase as predictive biomarkers for the prognosis of male breast cancer.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Osteosarcopenia as a Predictor of Histopathologic Response to Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Esophageal Cancer: a Retrospective Cohort Study.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To investigate the relationship between the Scottish inflammatory prognostic score (SIPS), treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), and prognostication in patients with neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy (NICT) for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). Methods: A retrospective investigation was carried out on 208 ESCC patients treated with NICT. The relationships between the SIPS, TRAEs, and prognosis [disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS)] were analyzed. Results: The patients, comprising 62 (29.8%) cases of SIPS0, 103 (49.5%) cases of SIPS1, and 43 (20.7%) cases of SIPS2, were categorized into three groups based on SIPS. Among patients with SIPS2, the oldest age (P=0.006), lowest BMI (P=0.001), longest tumor length (P=0.001), most advanced ypT stage (P=0.014), and ypN stage (P<0.001) were identified. Pathological complete response (PCR) rates showed statistically significant variations between the three groups (SIPS0: 45.2%, SIPS1: 27.2%, SIPS2: 16.3%, P=0.004). All TRAEs were found in 63.9% (133 cases) of the cases, with serious TRAEs (grade 3-4) accounting for 13.9% (29 cases). TRAEs themselves were not linked with SIPS (P=0.668), while serious TRAEs had a significant correlation with SIPS (P=0.002). Multivariate logistic analysis showed that SIPS2 seemed to confer serious TRAEs [odds radio (OR)=4.044; 95% CI: 1.395-11.722; P=0.010]. For patients classified as SIPS0, 1, or 2, the 3-year DFS was 83.9%, 58.3%, and 39.5% (P<0.001). The 3-year OS for those with SIPS0, 1, or 2 was 88.7%, 72.8%, and 53.5%, respectively (P<0.001). SIPS was substantially correlated with DFS (but not with OS) and could be utilized as an independent predictor [SIPS2: hazard ratio (HR)=3.743, 95% CI: 1.770-7.914, P=0.001; SIPS1: HR=2.303, 95% CI: 1.149-4.616, P=0.019]. Conclusion: The SIPS is associated with serious TRAEs and can be used as a predictor of serious TRAEs in ESCC receiving NICT. SIPS may be employed for pretreatment assessment since it was found to be substantially correlated with DFS.
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.