ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2026
Prognostic value of systemic immune-inflammation index in patients with localized and advanced renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Translational andrology and urology, 2026. 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
Background: Although several individual studies have suggested its potential role, comprehensive evidence across the overall renal cell carcinoma (RCC) population remains lacking. This study aimed to systematically assess the prognostic value of the systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) among patients diagnosed with RCC. Methods: A structured literature search was performed across PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library to retrieve eligible studies published up to October 2025. These studies examined the association between SII and clinical outcomes such as overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), or cancer-specific survival (CSS) in patients with RCC. To synthesize the data, pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Additionally, the consistency of the outcomes and potential heterogeneity across studies were examined using subgroup and sensitivity analyses. Results: A total of 22 individual studies fulfilled the criteria for inclusion in the analysis. The meta-analysis demonstrated that higher SII was significantly associated with worse OS (HR =1.89, 95% CI: 1.64-2.18, P<0.001), PFS (HR =1.74, 95% CI: 1.53-1.97, P<0.001), and CSS (HR =1.63, 95% CI: 1.01-2.63, P=0.04). Subgroup analyses indicated that these associations were consistent across different subgroups and suggested that geographic region, SII cut-off values, and disease stage were the main sources of heterogeneity. The results remained consistent across sensitivity analyses, supporting their reliability. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that SII is a strong, independent prognostic predictor for patients with RCC, with prognostic relevance across the disease course and practical accessibility in clinical practice. Future prospective studies are warranted to establish standardized cut-off values and further elucidate the underlying biological mechanisms.
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.