본문으로 건너뛰기
← 뒤로

Evaluation of six clinical prognostic scores in NSCLC patients undergoing first line chemoimmunotherapy.

Frontiers in immunology 2026 Vol.17() p. 1695859

Sun J, Li D, Liu J, Wang L, Wang L, Han J, Zhang X, Zhou X, Feng L, Fan Z, Zuo J, Wang Y

📝 환자 설명용 한 줄

[BACKGROUND] The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of six prognostic scores for predicting the outcomes to first-line chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients.

🔬 핵심 임상 통계 (초록에서 자동 추출 — 원문 검증 권장)
  • p-value P = 0.003
  • 95% CI 11.9-17.1

이 논문을 인용하기

BibTeX ↓ RIS ↓
APA Sun J, Li D, et al. (2026). Evaluation of six clinical prognostic scores in NSCLC patients undergoing first line chemoimmunotherapy.. Frontiers in immunology, 17, 1695859. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2026.1695859
MLA Sun J, et al.. "Evaluation of six clinical prognostic scores in NSCLC patients undergoing first line chemoimmunotherapy.." Frontiers in immunology, vol. 17, 2026, pp. 1695859.
PMID 41782884

Abstract

[BACKGROUND] The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of six prognostic scores for predicting the outcomes to first-line chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients.

[MATERIALS AND METHODS] NSCLC patients receiving first-line CIT were included. The prognostic scores evaluated were RMH, MDACC, MDACC+NLR, MDA-ICI, LIPI, and GRIm. Survival curves were generated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted via the Cox proportional hazards regression model. The C-index and time-dependent AUC were calculated to comprehensively quantify and compare the predictive performance of each system. The Log-rank test and False Discovery Rate (FDR) correction was employed to compare survival outcomes across different risk groups defined by the six prognostic scoring systems.

[RESULTS] A cohort of 298 NSCLC patients was analyzed. The median overall survival (mOS) of patients receiving first-line CIT was 36.5 months (95%CI: NE-NE), and the median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 14.5 months (95%CI: 11.9-17.1). Multivariate analysis showed that bone metastasis ( = 0.042), and more than two metastatic sites ( = 0.031) as independent predictors of poor OS. In quantitative performance comparison, RMH achieved the highest C-indices for both OS (0.672, 95%CI: 0.531-0.813) and PFS (0.652, 0.564-0.737); MDACC also performed well, with C-indices for OS (0.651, 0.564-0.737) and PFS (0.615, 0.554-0.738). Time-dependent AUC analysis showed that MDA-ICI attained the highest 1-year OS and PFS AUC (0.630 and 0.592), followed by the MDACC+NLR (0.600 and 0.571). Based on log-rank testing and following FDR correction, only the MDACC maintained a statistically significant association with OS (high-risk 14.0 vs. intermediate-risk 34.6 vs. low-risk NR months; P = 0.003, Q = 0.036). For PFS, the MDACC+NLR score showed a marginal significance after FDR correction (Q = 0.054).

[CONCLUSIONS] The RMH, MDACC, and MDACC+NLR scoring systems all demonstrate prognostic utility in the NSCLC patients treated with first-line CIT, and the optimal choice among them may depend on the specific clinical context and the outcome metric of primary interest.

MeSH Terms

Humans; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Male; Female; Lung Neoplasms; Middle Aged; Aged; Prognosis; Immunotherapy; Adult; Aged, 80 and over; Treatment Outcome; Retrospective Studies; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols

같은 제1저자의 인용 많은 논문 (5)