» Articles » PMID: 38366659

Palliative Prognostic Scores for Survival Prediction of Cancer Patients: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Overview
Specialty Oncology
Date 2024 Feb 17
PMID 38366659
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The palliative prognostic score is the most widely validated prognostic tool for cancer survival prediction, with modified versions available. A systematic evaluation of palliative prognostic score tools is lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the performance and prognostic utility of palliative prognostic score, delirium-palliative prognostic score, and palliative prognostic score without clinician prediction in predicting 30-day survival of cancer patients and to compare their performance.

Methods: Six databases were searched for peer-reviewed studies and grey literature published from inception to June 2, 2023. English studies must assess palliative prognostic score, delirium-palliative prognostic score, or palliative prognostic score without clinician-predicted survival for 30-day survival in adults aged 18 years and older with any stage or type of cancer. Outcomes were pooled using the random effects model or summarized narratively when meta-analysis was not possible.

Results: A total of 39 studies (n = 10 617 patients) were included. Palliative prognostic score is an accurate prognostic tool (pooled area under the curve [AUC] = 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.79 to 0.84) and outperforms palliative prognostic score without clinician-predicted survival (pooled AUC = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.71 to 0.78), suggesting that the original palliative prognostic score should be preferred. The meta-analysis found palliative prognostic score and delirium-palliative prognostic score performance to be comparable. Most studies reported survival probabilities corresponding to the palliative prognostic score risk groups, and higher risk groups were statistically significantly associated with shorter survival.

Conclusions: Palliative prognostic score is a validated prognostic tool for cancer patients that can enhance clinicians' confidence and accuracy in predicting survival. Future studies should investigate if accuracy differs depending on clinician characteristics. Reporting of validation studies must be improved, as most studies were at high risk of bias, primarily because calibration was not assessed.

Citing Articles

Prognostic models for survival predictions in advanced cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Fung M, Wong Y, Man Cheung K, Bao K, Sung W BMC Palliat Care. 2025; 24(1):54.

PMID: 40025487 PMC: 11871741. DOI: 10.1186/s12904-025-01696-4.

References
1.
Lewis E, Harrison R, Nicholson M, Hillman K, Trankle S, Rangel S . Clinicians' and public acceptability of universal risk-of-death screening for older people in routine clinical practice in Australia: cross-sectional surveys. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2020; 33(4):1063-1070. DOI: 10.1007/s40520-020-01598-w. View

2.
Hiratsuka Y, Kim D, Suh S, Kim S, Yoon S, Koh S . Comparison of Objective Prognostic Score and Palliative Prognostic Score performance in inpatients with advanced cancer in Japan and Korea. Palliat Support Care. 2022; 20(5):662-670. DOI: 10.1017/S1478951521001589. View

3.
Chow E, Harth T, Hruby G, Finkelstein J, Wu J, Danjoux C . How accurate are physicians' clinical predictions of survival and the available prognostic tools in estimating survival times in terminally ill cancer patients? A systematic review. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2001; 13(3):209-18. DOI: 10.1053/clon.2001.9256. View

4.
Cole A, Arthur A, Seymour J . Comparing the predictive ability of the Revised Minimum Dataset Mortality Risk Index (MMRI-R) with nurses' predictions of mortality among frail older people: a cohort study. Age Ageing. 2019; 48(3):394-400. DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afz011. View

5.
Martin E, Widera E . Prognostication in Serious Illness. Med Clin North Am. 2020; 104(3):391-403. DOI: 10.1016/j.mcna.2019.12.002. View