ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2025
Prognostic value of IMDC score in non-small cell lung cancer receiving immunotherapy: old dog, new tricks? : IMDC in lung cancer immunotherapy.
Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 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.
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
backgroundAlthough there are multiple treatment options, oncologists lack appropriate biomarkers for determining the efficacy and toxicity of immunotherapy. In this study, we aimed to use a combination of the clinical parameters of IMDC risk groups at the time of diagnosis to predict the effectiveness of immunotherapy.
methodsThis multicenter cross-sectional study retrospectively analyzed non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients receiving nivolumab for the prognostic effects of clinical factors, including the IMDC score.
resultsTwo hundred and five patients were enrolled in this study. There was no favorable group because the TTI was less than 1 year in the entire study group in the IMDC. The IMDC score and IMDC groups showed significant differences in PFS (p < 0.001; p < 0.001, respectively). Intermediate and poor-risk groups had PFS of 8 and 3 months PFS, respectively. The IMDC group showed a significant effect on OS (p = 0.002). The intermediate- and poor-risk groups had 12- and 4-month OS, respectively. The TTI risk factor excluded patient numbers in the favorable, intermediate, and poor risk groups were 47, 129, and 29, respectively, in the revised IMDC group (rIMDC). The prognostic effect of the rIMDC score and groups remained significant (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). The classical IMDC had a significant effect on PFS in the multivariate analysis (p = 0.016). Also, rIMDC score in multivariate analysis resulted with significant effect on OS (p = 0.035).
conclusionTo date, this is the first study to prove that the IMDC may be a valuable option for predicting both prognosis and treatment efficacy in NSCLC patients receiving especially second or further lines nivolumab treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39971806What 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.