Prognostic and clinical pathological significance of the systemic immune-inflammation index in urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: A new non-invasive biomarker, the Systemic Immune-Inflammation Index (SII), has been proven to have prognostic value in multiple cancers. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the prognostic and clinical pathological significance of SII in urothelial carcinoma. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted across multiple databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and CNKI. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated to evaluate the prognostic value of SII before treatment on survival outcomes, and odds ratios (OR) with 95%CI were used to assess the correlation between SII before treatment and clinical pathological features. Results: This meta-analysis included a total of 10 studies (11 datasets) with 6,333 patients. The pooled analysis showed that high SII before surgery was significantly associated with poor survival outcomes in patients with urothelial carcinoma, including overall survival (OS) (HR=1.55, 95%CI 1.24-1.95, p<0.001), cancer-specific survival (CSS) (HR=2.74, 95%CI 1.67-4.49, p<0.001), recurrence-free survival (RFS) (HR=2.74, 95%CI 1.67-4.49, p<0.001), and progression-free survival (PFS) (HR=1.66, 95%CI 1.36-2.02, p<0.001). In addition, patients with elevated preoperative SII values were more likely to have adverse pathological features, including larger tumor size and advanced pathological T stage (p<0.001). Conclusion: These findings suggest a significant association between high SII levels before treatment and poor survival outcomes, as well as certain clinical pathological features, in patients with urothelial carcinoma.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".