ArticleWorld journal of urology2025
Prognostic scores for predicting overall survival in patients with metastatic renal and urothelial cancer undergoing immunotherapy - which one to use?
Article in World journal of urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Prognostic and predictive factors of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy in urinary bladder cancer.Pathology oncology research : POR · 2026Review
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
purposeEvaluation of the prognostic significance of four different scoring systems in a real-world cohort of patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) or renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) undergoing immunotherapy (IO).
methodsFor 120 patients with mUC (n = 67) and mRCC (n = 53) who received IO between July 2016 and December 2020 at the tertiary Urological University Medical Centre Mannheim, the following scores were recorded at pre-treatment baseline: modified Glasgow prognostic score (mGPS), systemic immune-inflammation index (SII), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), neutrophil-to-eosinophil ratio (NER). Overall survival (time between the beginning of IO until the patients' death or last contact) was determined for every patient.
resultsKaplan-Meier analyses revealed that high baseline mGPS, SII (> 979) and NLR (> 3) were associated with poor overall survival (OS) (p < 0.05). Cox proportional hazards regression analyses showed that baseline mGPS and NLR had a significant independent prognostic influence on OS (p < 0.05), of which mGPS had a greater significance (p < 0.001, mGPS Score 2 vs. Score 0: HR 4.1, 95% CI 1.9-8.8). Although a high baseline NER (63.9) was associated with poor OS, it did not reach statistical significance. Baseline NER was also not identified as a significant score in the regression analyses.
conclusionmGPS, SII and NLR are scoring systems that are easy to record in routine clinical practice. As they provide good prediction of OS in patients with mUC and mRCC under IO, they may allow identification of patients at high-risk and monitor them more cautiously in addition to imaging.
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.