MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415692551 · doi:10.21037/tlcr-2025-518

The prognostic importance of the pan-immune-inflammation value (PIV) in lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4415692551 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Quanqing Liu, Hao Wen, Yuan Zeng

Bibliographic record

VenueTranslational Lung Cancer Research · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInflammatory Biomarkers in Disease Prognosis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLung cancerBiomarkerLungValue (mathematics)Survival analysisPrognostic model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Preliminary studies suggest that pan-immune-inflammation value (PIV) has the potential to serve as a prognostic tool for lung cancer. However, existing studies are limited by inconsistent findings regarding the impact of high PIV on patient outcomes. To provide a more comprehensive assessment, we conducted a meta-analysis to clarify the prognostic value of PIV in lung cancer. Methods: Two researchers independently searched the PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science databases for studies evaluating the associations between PIV and prognoses in lung cancer patients (up to July 15, 2025). Studies were included if they reported high versus low PIV and provided hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), etc. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Pooled HRs and 95% CIs were calculated to determine the associations between PIV and patient prognosis. Results: A total of ten studies comprising 1,969 patients were included. Meta-analyses demonstrated that high PIV was significantly associated with OS (HR =2.86, 95% CI: 2.23-3.65, P<0.001) and PFS (HR =2.06, 95% CI: 1.65-2.59, P<0.001) in lung cancer patients. In non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, high PIV was significantly associated with worse OS (HR =2.76, 95% CI: 2.14-3.56, P<0.001) and PFS (HR =1.94, 95% CI: 1.55-2.42, P<0.001). In small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients, even stronger associations were observed for OS (HR =3.47, 95% CI: 2.21-5.44, P<0.001) and PFS (HR =2.33, 95% CI: 1.63-3.33, P<0.001). Subgroup analyses further confirmed that PIV served as a critical prognostic marker for both OS and PFS. All studies were of high quality according to the NOS. Conclusions: PIV can serve as an independent prognostic biomarker for survival outcomes in lung cancer patients. Therefore, incorporating PIV into prognostic assessments may provide additional support for individualized treatment decision-making.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.042
Bibliometrics0.0080.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.378 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTranslational Lung Cancer ResearchSame topicInflammatory Biomarkers in Disease PrognosisFrench-language works237,207