ArticleESMO open2025
Impact of the Lung Immune Prognostic Index in non-small-cell lung cancer patients with PD-L1-low/negative tumors receiving chemoimmunotherapy: a real-world multicenter retrospective study.
Article in ESMO open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChemoimmunotherapy has become one of the standard first-line treatment options for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) across programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) strata, yet outcomes in PD-L1-low/negative disease remain suboptimal. We evaluated whether the Lung Immune Prognostic Index (LIPI) at treatment initiation has prognostic value in this subgroup. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study across nine Japanese hospitals (January 2016-September 2021). Clinical data, including results of pretreatment blood tests at first-line treatment initiation, were collected and used to categorize LIPI (good, intermediate, or poor). Endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Kaplan-Meier and log-rank tests were used; prespecified multivariable Cox models were adjusted for LIPI (poor versus good/intermediate), PD-L1 tumor proportion score, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, liver/brain metastases, treatment regimen, and age.
resultsWe analyzed 176 patients (median age 71 years: PD-L1-low, 60.8%; PD-L1-negative, 39.2%). Median PFS and OS were 7.3 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 6.4-9.0 months] and 21.5 months (95% CI 15.4-24.6 months), respectively. Poor LIPI was associated with worse outcomes than good/intermediate LIPI (PFS: 3.6 versus 9.0 months, OS: 7.8 versus 23.9 months, both P < 0.001). In multivariable models, poor LIPI remained independently prognostic [PFS: adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 2.64, 95% CI 1.66-4.21; OS: adjusted HR 2.82, 95% CI 1.73-4.61].
conclusionsIn first-line chemoimmunotherapy-treated PD-L1-low/negative NSCLC, baseline LIPI can be used to independently stratify PFS and OS and identify a subgroup with poor prognosis. LIPI may support risk stratification at first-line treatment initiation. Prospective studies are warranted to validate these findings and optimize personalized treatment approaches.
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.