ArticleScientific reports2025
Prognostic relevance of geriatric nutritional risk index and the prognostic nutritional index in geriatric extensive stage small cell lung cancer.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The management of extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) in older adults requires balancing aggressive disease biology with age-related vulnerabilities. With the increasing use of immune checkpoint inhibitors, the prognostic relevance of inflammatory-nutritional indices remains unclear in this population. We evaluated the independent prognostic utility of the Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) and Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI) in a retrospective cohort of 83 patients aged ≥ 65 years with ES-SCLC receiving first-line systemic therapy. While optimal cut-offs for both GNRI and PNI successfully stratified overall survival in unadjusted analyses, neither index retained independent statistical significance in multivariable Cox models adjusted for key covariates (including sex, liver metastasis and chemoimmunotherapy, also performance status as stratification factor). Instead, survival outcomes were predominantly driven by performance status, sex, and treatment modality. Specifically, female sex and the receipt of chemoimmunotherapy emerged as robust independent predictors of improved survival, superseding the prognostic signal of baseline nutritional reserves. In conclusion, functional status and the efficacy of modern systemic therapies appear to outweigh the impact of baseline nutritional indices in this setting. Consequently, GNRI and PNI should serve as adjunctive tools for nutritional support rather than primary prognostic markers.
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.