↓ Skip to main content

Integrating On-Treatment Modified Glasgow Prognostic Score and Imaging to Predict Response and Outcomes in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA Oncology, August 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
14 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
61 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Integrating On-Treatment Modified Glasgow Prognostic Score and Imaging to Predict Response and Outcomes in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma
Published in
JAMA Oncology, August 2023
DOI 10.1001/jamaoncol.2023.1822
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jonas Saal, Tobias Bald, Markus Eckstein, Damian J. Ralser, Manuel Ritter, Peter Brossart, Viktor Grünwald, Michael Hölzel, Jörg Ellinger, Niklas Klümper

Abstract

In the era of immuno-oncology, imaging alone seems to be insufficient to capture treatment responses, as patients with stable disease treated with immunotherapy have a wide range of clinical outcomes. There is an unmet need for complementary (ideally cost-efficient) markers that enable assessment of therapy response and outcomes in conjunction with imaging. To examine whether longitudinal changes in the modified Glasgow prognostic score (mGPS), which is based on C-reactive protein and albumin, can predict responses and outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). This post hoc analysis, conducted from October 2022 to April 2023, evaluated the prognostic and predictive performance of on-treatment mGPS in patients with mRCC being treated with atezolizumab (plus bevacizumab) or sunitinib in 2 randomized clinical trials: the phase 3 IMmotion151 study (discovery cohort) and the phase 2 IMmotion150 study (validation cohort). Outcomes were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1 and overall survival (OS) for survival analyses. To compare the prognostic value of the on-treatment mGPS with radiologic staging, we used RECIST assessed by the Independent Review Committee (IRC-RECIST) to ensure high data quality. Of the 915 patients with mRCC in the IMmotion151 discovery cohort, baseline mGPS was available for 861 patients and on-treatment mGPS for 691. The IMmotion150 validation cohort included 305 patients with mRCC, and on-treatment mGPS could be evaluated for 199. In the IMmotion150 study, on-treatment mGPS predicted outcomes as early as 6 weeks following therapy initiation, thereby opening a window for early therapy adjustments. In both clinical trials, on-treatment mGPS provided valuable prognostic information regardless of imaging-assessed treatment response at first staging. Of note, in the disease control subgroup, on-treatment mGPS exhibited superior and independent prognostic information compared with IRC-RECIST (available for 611 patients; C-index, 0.651 [95% CI, 0.588-0.714] for the mGPS during treatment vs 0.574 [95% CI, 0.528-0.619] for IRC-RECIST). These data support the concept of integrating on-treatment mGPS for more holistic and patient-centered therapy monitoring in addition to radiologic staging to improve clinical care at a low cost for patients with mRCC.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 61 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 18%
Unspecified 1 9%
Student > Master 1 9%
Unknown 4 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 45%
Unspecified 1 9%
Sports and Recreations 1 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 9%
Unknown 3 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 146. 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 18 February 2024.
All research outputs
#285,602
of 25,550,333 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Oncology
#470
of 3,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,393
of 358,354 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Oncology
#12
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,550,333 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,332 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 84.3. 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 358,354 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.