Cisplatin-Induced Renal Failure Measured by Glomerular Filtration Rate (GFR) with 99mTc-DTPA Scans in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cisplatin is a potent agent commonly used to treat cancer, but its effects pose a significant risk to renal function. Therefore, the present study aimed to evaluate the impact of cisplatin on renal function as measured by glomerular filtration rate (GFR) using diethyltriamine-penta-acetic acid (DTPA) renal scintigraphy. Methods: Extensive literature searches were performed using PRISMA guidelines that investigated cisplatin-induced renal failure by measuring GFR with DTPA. Eligible studies were included based on predefined criteria. Data on GFR, serum creatinine levels, and acute kidney injury (AKI) before and after cisplatin therapy were extracted and analyzed. A meta-analysis was performed utilizing RevMan 5.4 to determine the overall effect of cisplatin on GFR before and after treatment. For non-randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quality assessment was performed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale, while for RCT, the Cochrane risk of bias tool was utilized. Results: Initially, 1003 studies were searched from different databases, including ScienceDirect, PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and The Cochrane Library, and after screening, 8 studies (PubMed, Scopus, and GoogleS cholar) with 489 patients were found eligible for inclusion in the present study. Cisplatin was administrated with varying doses ranging from 20 mg/m2 to 114.02 mg/m2. The findings underscore the nephrotoxic effects of cisplatin, a widely used chemotherapeutic agent, as demonstrated by the significant decline in GFR observed across multiple treatment cycles, and these findings were also supported by the findings of a meta-analysis that showed a significant (p < 0.01) difference between peri- and post-treatment GFR level with 37.06 (95% CI, 10.90–63.23) effect size and 96% heterogeneity. In addition, the included studies were found to be of high quality. Conclusions: Cisplatin significantly affects renal function, as evidenced by a decrease in GFR measured with DTPA. The findings underscore the importance of the routine monitoring of GFR to detect early renal injury and guide treatment modification. Future research should focus on strategies to reduce cisplatin-induced toxicity and explore alternative therapies with reduced renal risk.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".