ReviewCancers2026
GFR Evaluation Among Patients with Cancer: Insights and Clinical Implications.
Review in Cancers, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Malignancy as a Predictor and Potential Modifier of Laboratory Biomarker Prognostic Value in Acute Pulmonary Embolism.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Continuous multidimensional physiological monitoring redefines early warning and preemptive treatment for neutropenic sepsis following cisplatin chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Accurately assessing the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) is critical in patients with cancer for acute kidney injury diagnosis, chemotherapy selection, drug dosing, and clinical trial eligibility. Yet, traditional equations such as Cockcroft-Gault and MDRD fail due to multiple physiological changes specific to this vulnerable population. Cancer-related sarcopenia, creatinine secretion blockade, and total body volume fluctuations may lead to inaccurate GFR estimations. This ultimately leads to undertreatment of underlying malignancy, overdosing of nephrotoxic therapies with adverse effects, and excluding patients from clinical trials unnecessarily. The 2024 KDIGO guidelines as well as the American Society of Onconephrology position statement recommend the use of combined GFR equation such as CKD-EPI 2021 that utilizes both cystatin C and creatinine to improve GFR estimation accuracy. Direct GFR measurement via exogenous filtration markers should be pursued in high-risk patients when precise values are warranted. This review highlights current challenges associated with GFR evaluation in patients with cancer and outlines clinical implications as well as recent recommendations for optimal clinical practice.
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.