ArticleERJ open research2025
External validation of the LENT and PROMISE prognostic scores for malignant pleural effusion.
Article in ERJ open research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Retrospective cohort study on prognostic factors of malignant pleural effusion secondary to pleural mesothelioma.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Integrating pleural PD-1Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Retrospective cohort study of survival length in malignant pleural effusion between 2015 and 2023.BMJ open respiratory research · 2025Article
- Evaluation of prognostic scores and factors affecting survival in patients with malignant pleural effusion.Annals of thoracic medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Accurate survival estimation in malignant pleural effusion is essential to guide clinical management strategies and inform patient discussion. The LENT and PROMISE scores were developed to aid prognostication in malignant pleural effusion; however their uptake in practice has been limited. We aimed to conduct a detailed external validation of the LENT and PROMISE scores to develop recommendations regarding clinical utility, and to highlight factors limiting performance. Methods: Medical records of patients diagnosed with malignant pleural effusion between 2015-2023 at Oxford University Hospitals were retrospectively reviewed to determine length of survival and the LENT and PROMISE scores at diagnosis. Performance of the scores in predicting overall survival and chance of survival at 3, 6 and 12 months was assessed using measures of discrimination, calibration and overall model performance. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox models were utilised to further investigate individual score variables. Results: 773 patients with malignant pleural effusion were included. Both scores showed predictive ability for overall survival; however median survival estimates lacked precision. Score performance in predicting survival at 3, 6 and 12 months was stronger, with C-indices around 0.8 for both at each time point, and the models appearing well calibrated. Limited stratification of tumour types and lack of consideration of sensitising mutations were demonstrated to be potential factors restricting performance. Conclusions: Both scores have the ability to prognosticate in malignant pleural effusion, and greater use in practice should be considered. However, areas to improve score performance were also highlighted, and these may aid future model development.
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.