Despite significant improvement of clinical outcomes of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with immunotherapy, our knowledge of optimal biomarkers is still limited.
We retrospectively evaluated 159 advanced NSCLC patients in our institution treated with nivolumab after disease progression during platinum-based chemotherapy. We correlated several variables with progression-free survival (PFS) to develop the immunotherapy, Sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and Delta NLR (iSEND) model. We categorized patients into iSEND good, intermediate, and poor risk groups and evaluated their clinical outcomes. Performance of iSEND at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months was evaluated according to receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and internally validated using bootstrapping. The association of iSEND risk groups with clinical benefit was evaluated using logistic regression.
Median follow-up was 11.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.4-13.1). There were 50 deaths and 43 with disease progression without death. PFS rates at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months were 78.4%, 63.7%, 55.3%, and 52.2% in iSEND good; 79.4%, 44.3%, 25.9%, and 19.2% in iSEND intermediate; and 65%, 25.9%, 22.8%, and 17.8% in iSEND poor. Time-dependent area under ROC curves of iSEND for PFS at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months were 0.718, 0.74, 0.746, and 0.774. The iSEND poor group was significantly associated with progressive disease at 12 ± 2 weeks (odds ratio, 9.59; 95% CI, 3.8-26.9; P < .0001).
The iSEND model is an algorithmic model that can characterize clinical outcomes of advanced NSCLC patients receiving nivolumab into good, intermediate, or poor risk groups and might be useful as a predictive model if validated independently.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
4
6%
Nursing and Health Professions
2
3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences
2
3%
Other
4
6%
Unknown
21
32%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 December 2017.
All research outputs
#4,227,215
of 34,397,553 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Lung Cancer
#250
of 1,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,486
of 494,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Lung Cancer
#2
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,397,553 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,773 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 494,113 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
