Gustave Roussy Immune Score and Royal Marsden Hospital Prognostic Score Are Prognostic Markers for Extensive Disease of Small Cell Lung Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Royal Marsden Hospital prognostic score (RMH score) and the Gustave Roussy immune score (GRIm-score) were developed in order to select more suitable patient for phase I trials. Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and serum albumin concentration are common risk factors to these two systems. As the third risk factor, the RMH score and the GRIm-score adopt number of metastatic sites and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), respectively. We aimed to investigate whether these two systems are also useful for extensive disease of small cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC). METHODS: We retrospectively collected 128 patients who had initiated platinum-based chemotherapy at our hospital between September 2007 and March 2018. We divided our patients into low (score 0 - 1) and high (2 - 3) score groups, and compared overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) between them. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard analyses found prognostic factors of survival times. RESULTS: Regarding GRIm-score, OS was significantly shorter in high score group than in low score group (median 6.1 vs. 11.4 months, P < 0.01), while no significant difference was observed in PFS (median 4.7 vs. 5.0 months, P = 0.12). Both OS (median 6.9 vs. 12.4 months, P < 0.01) and PFS (median 4.4 vs. 5.4 months, P = 0.01) were significantly shorter in high RMH score group than in low group. Multivariate analyses detected both high GRIm-score (hazard ratio (HR) 1.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.20 - 2.72, P < 0.01) and high RMH score (HR 1.93, 95% CI 1.27 - 2.92, P < 0.01) as independent worse prognostic factors of OS, and then only high RMH score (HR 1.53, 95% CI 1.04 - 2.25, P = 0.03) as independent worse prognostic factor of PFS. CONCLUSIONS: Both RMH score and GRIm-score are useful as independent prognostic factors of OS in ED-SCLC. However, only RMH score is an independent prognostic factor of PFS.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".