Predicting outcomes of Lung Cancer using the modified glasgow prognostic score: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background & Objective: Previous studies have suggested that the modified Glasgow Prognostic Score (mGPS) could be a potential biomarker for lung cancer (LC). However, the association between mGPS and overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) in lung cancer patients remains unclear. The purpose of our study was to investigate possible correlation between mGPS and OS or PFS in LC patients. Methods: An extensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMbase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Trip Database, Worldwide Science, and Google Scholar databases was done for relevant articles, published prior to May 30, 2021, that report correlation between mGPS and OS or PFS in LC patients. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used as the main parameters for evaluation. Results: A total of 28 studies involving 9,748 lung cancer patients were analysed. The pooled analysis revealed that elevated mGPS (≥ 0) was associated with poor OS (HR=1.54; 95% CI, 1.32-1.77) and PFS (HR=1.49; 95% CI, 1.17-1.82). Furthermore, a significant correlation between mGPS (1 or 2) and OS was observed. However, no significant correlation was found between mGPS (1 or 2) and PFS. Subgroup analysis based on ethnicity demonstrated that mGPS ≥ 0 was associated with worse OS compared to mGPS=0 in both Asian (HR=1.46; 95% CI, 1.04-1.89; p<0.05) and Caucasian (HR=1.64; 95% CI, 1.35-1.94; p<0.05) cohorts of LC patients. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that positive mGPS is associated with poor survival results. Therefore, mGPS may be used as a biomarker for predicting prognosis in LC patients.

A prognostic signature for lung adenocarcinoma by five genes associated with chemotherapy in lung adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) is one of the most common subtypes of lung cancer. Finding prognostic biomarkers is helpful in stratifying LUAD patients with different prognosis. METHODS: We explored the correlation of LUAD prognosis and genes associated with chemotherapy in LUAD and obtained data of LUAD patients from the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) databases. Drug sensitivity data were acquired from the Genomics of Drug Sensitivity in Cancer (GDSC) database. Differential and enrichment analyses were used to screen the target genes utilizing limma and "clusterProfiler" packages. Then univariate and LASSO Cox analyses were used to select the prognosis-related genes. Survival analysis was used to estimate the overall survival (OS) of different groups. RESULTS: Twenty-three differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were screened between LUAD samples and healthy samples, and BTK, FGFR2, PIM2, CHEK1, and CDK1 were selected to construct a prognostic signature. The OS of patients in the high-risk group (risk score higher than 0.69) was worse than that in the low-risk group (risk score lower than 0.69). CONCLUSION: The risk score model constructed by five genes is a potential prognostic biomarker for LUAD patients.

Life quality improvement of patients with non-small cell lung cancer undergoing targeted therapy: A case study of continuous care.

To investigate the improvement effect of targeted therapy on non-small cell carcinoma patients life quality after the continuous nursing intervention. 104 non-small cell lung cancer patients in our hospital from July 2017 to November 2019 were allocated evenly and randomly into the control group (C) and the study group (S). By using clinical baseline data, quality of life questionnaire core 30 for cancer patients, evaluation of patient compliance behavior, the MOS item short-form health survey (SF-36), self rating depression scale (SDS), self rating anxiety scale (SAS), Overall Survival (OS) progression-free survival and adverse reaction symptoms were evaluated for the life quality of patients. There was comparability between the 2 sets of basic data. There was no significant difference in quality of life questionnaire core 30, SF-36, SAS, or SDS scores before treatment. After 3 months, there was a significant difference in the scores of various scales before treatment. At the same time, there was significant statistical significance before and after treatment in Group S. Their compliance rates were 84.62% and 98.08%. Adverse reactions incidence in Group S was lower. Taking a 2-year follow-up period as an example, significant statistical differences existed in OS and progression-free survival rates between adenocarcinoma and squamous carcinoma. SDS and SAS had high consistency in scoring with QLQ-30 and SF-36 scales. Targeted treatment for non-small cell carcinoma patients significantly improves their life quality and reduces the incidence of adverse reactions after continuous nursing intervention.

Effect of icotinib on advanced lung adenocarcinoma patients with sensitive EGFR mutation detected in ctDNA by ddPCR.

BACKGROUND: Whether or not EGFR mutation status detected by ddPCR in plasma predicts the effect of icotinib on patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma was determined. METHODS: Plasma and matched tissue specimens from patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma were collected prior to icotinib treatment. The ARMS method was used to detect EGFR mutation status in DNA extracted from tissue specimens, while the EGFR mutation status in ctDNA extracted from plasma specimens was determined by ddPCR. The therapeutic effects of icotinib were compared between patients with EGFR-activating mutations detected by ddPCR in ctDNA and ARMS in tissue DNA. RESULTS: EGFR mutation status was detected in 96 tissue and 100 plasma specimens. The sensitivity and positive predictive value of 19del detected in ctDNA by ddPCR was 70.97% (22/31) and 44.90% (22/49), respectively. The positive predictive value was 84.62% (22/26) and the sensitivity was 53.66% (22/41) for the L858R mutation. For the common sensitive EGFR mutations, ddPCR had a positive predictive value of 77.19% (44/57) and a sensitivity of 48.89% (44/90). Patients with sensitive EGFR mutations in ctDNA had objective response and disease control rates (DCR) similar to patients who had sensitive EGFR mutations in tissues detected by ARMS when treated with icotinib (57.14% vs. 51.51% and 92.86% vs. 90.91%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with sensitive EGFR mutations in plasma specimens detected with ddPCR had a higher ORR and DCR compared with patients with sensitive EGFR mutations in tissue detected with the ARMS method.