For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
8
views
53
references
 Top references
cited by
20
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      173
      similar
       All similar
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Systemic Inflammation Response Index as a Prognostic Marker in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 38 Cohorts

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The systemic inflammation response index (SIRI), a novel and cost-effective serum biomarker, is associated with prognosis in patients with cancer. However, the prognostic value of the SIRI in cancer remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the potential role of the SIRI as a prognostic indicator in cancer.

          Methods

          Reports in which the prognostic value of the SIRI in cancer was evaluated were retrieved from electronic databases. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated to evaluate the prognostic significance of the SIRI. The odds ratio (OR) was also calculated to explore the association between the SIRI and clinicopathological features.

          Results

          This study included 30 retrospective studies with 38 cohorts and 10 754 cases. The meta-analysis indicated that a high SIRI was associated with short overall survival (OS) (HR = 2.04, 95% CI = 1.82–2.29, P < .001) and disease-free survival (DFS)/recurrence-free survival (RFS)/progression-free survival (PFS) (HR = 2.08, 95% CI = 1.84–2.34, P < .001). Subgroup analysis showed that the prognostic value of the SIRI was significant in all kinds of cancer included. Moreover, the SIRI was significantly correlated with sex, tumor size, T stage, N stage, TNM stage, and lymphovascular invasion.

          Conclusion

          The pretreatment SIRI could be a promising universal prognostic indicator in cancer.

          Related collections

          Most cited references53

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          Hallmarks of Cancer: The Next Generation

          Douglas Hanahan, Robert A. Weinberg (2011)
          The hallmarks of cancer comprise six biological capabilities acquired during the multistep development of human tumors. The hallmarks constitute an organizing principle for rationalizing the complexities of neoplastic disease. They include sustaining proliferative signaling, evading growth suppressors, resisting cell death, enabling replicative immortality, inducing angiogenesis, and activating invasion and metastasis. Underlying these hallmarks are genome instability, which generates the genetic diversity that expedites their acquisition, and inflammation, which fosters multiple hallmark functions. Conceptual progress in the last decade has added two emerging hallmarks of potential generality to this list-reprogramming of energy metabolism and evading immune destruction. In addition to cancer cells, tumors exhibit another dimension of complexity: they contain a repertoire of recruited, ostensibly normal cells that contribute to the acquisition of hallmark traits by creating the "tumor microenvironment." Recognition of the widespread applicability of these concepts will increasingly affect the development of new means to treat human cancer. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
          Article 0 comments Cited 11986 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

            Julian P. T. Higgins, Douglas G. Altman, Peter C. Gøtzsche … (2014)
            Flaws in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of randomised trials can cause the effect of an intervention to be underestimated or overestimated. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias aims to make the process clearer and more accurate
            Article 0 comments Cited 7501 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration

              Alessandro Liberati, Douglas G. Altman, Jennifer Tetzlaff … (2010)
              Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are essential to summarise evidence relating to efficacy and safety of healthcare interventions accurately and reliably. The clarity and transparency of these reports, however, are not optimal. Poor reporting of systematic reviews diminishes their value to clinicians, policy makers, and other users. Since the development of the QUOROM (quality of reporting of meta-analysis) statement—a reporting guideline published in 1999—there have been several conceptual, methodological, and practical advances regarding the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Also, reviews of published systematic reviews have found that key information about these studies is often poorly reported. Realising these issues, an international group that included experienced authors and methodologists developed PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) as an evolution of the original QUOROM guideline for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of evaluations of health care interventions. The PRISMA statement consists of a 27-item checklist and a four-phase flow diagram. The checklist includes items deemed essential for transparent reporting of a systematic review. In this explanation and elaboration document, we explain the meaning and rationale for each checklist item. For each item, we include an example of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature. The PRISMA statement, this document, and the associated website (www.prisma-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
              Article 0 comments Cited 3621 times – based on 0 reviews     Review now
                Bookmark
                All references

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Journal ID (nlm-ta): Dose Response
                Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Dose Response
                Journal ID (hwp): spdos
                Journal ID (publisher-id): DOS
                Title: Dose-Response
                Publisher: SAGE Publications (Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA )
                ISSN (Electronic): 1559-3258
                Publication date (Electronic): 15 December 2021
                Publication date Collection: Oct-Dec 2021
                Volume: 19
                Issue: 4
                Electronic Location Identifier: 15593258211064744
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ringgold 34732, universityPeking Union Medical College Hospital; , Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
                [2 ]universityNational Clinical Research Center for Obstetric and Gynecologic Diseases; , Beijing, China
                [3 ]universityPeking Union Medical College and Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences; , Beijing, China
                Author notes
                [*]Tao Wang, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, No. 1 Shuaifuyuan, Dongcheng District, Beijing 100730, China. Email: wangtaopumch@ 123456sina.com
                [*]

                These authors contributed equally to this article.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3284-6927
                Article
                Publisher ID: 10.1177_15593258211064744
                DOI: 10.1177/15593258211064744
                PMC ID: 8689621
                PubMed ID: 34987341
                SO-VID: 6a30d4db-f717-4197-947e-6e82c2a6093f
                Copyright © © The Author(s) 2021
                License:

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

                History
                Date received : 19 August 2021
                Date accepted : 17 November 2021
                Categories
                Subject: Original Article
                Custom metadata
                cover-date October-December 2021
                typesetter ts10

                Keywords: systemic inflammation response index,biomarker,cancer,prognosis,meta-analysis
                Data availability:
                Keywords: systemic inflammation response index, biomarker, cancer, prognosis, meta-analysis

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content173

                See all similar

                Cited by20

                See all cited by

                Most referenced authors926

                See all reference authors