How was this meta-analysis designed to evaluate CAR’s prognostic performance in RCC?
This study was designed as a PRISMA-guided systematic review and meta-analysis intended to clarify the prognostic role and clinical implementability of the C-reactive protein-to-albumin ratio (CAR) in RCC.
A systematic literature search was conducted across English-language databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library) from database inception through June 25, 2025, using MeSH and title/abstract terms capturing RCC and CAR (including CRP/Alb ratio variants). In addition to the electronic strategy, reference lists of retrieved articles were manually screened to identify eligible studies not captured in the initial search.
Study selection followed a sequential screening workflow (title/abstract review followed by full-text eligibility assessment). Two independent reviewers evaluated each candidate study for inclusion, with discrepancies adjudicated by a third reviewer serving as mediator.
Eligible studies were required to measure serum CAR prior to treatment initiation; enroll adults aged at least 18 years or older; include over 20 participants; use an observational design or randomized controlled trial framework; and report or allow derivation of TP/FP/FN/TN data to support pooled evaluation of CAR’s predictive performance in RCC. Exclusion criteria removed studies with insufficient prognostic performance reporting, animal/in vitro-only designs, duplicate/unclear datasets, or non-original research formats (reviews, abstracts, editorials/commentaries, and supplementary-only materials).
The meta-analysis was structured to synthesize evidence on CAR’s prognostic significance; potential mechanistic underpinnings; and future clinical applicability. To interrogate heterogeneity and generalizability, the investigators also prespecified subgroup analyses to compare predictive performance across countries/regions and across methodological and dimensional divisions.
What adverse effects were observed across studies in the analysis?
Treatment-emergent adverse effects (TEAEs) at least possibly related to study treatment demonstrated no unexpected toxicity signals. The only related grade 4 adverse effect (AE) was hypotension in 1 patient, which also met the protocol-defined prespecified extreme toxicity criterion. Related grade 3 AEs were infrequent and included increased alanine aminotransferase levels, anemia, and pain (n = 1 each). The most commonly reported related AE was decreased neutrophil count (n = 3).
Across all TEAEs regardless of attribution, all 10 patients experienced at least one adverse effect. Grade 3 or higher adverse effects included pain (n = 2) and abdominal pain, increased alanine aminotransferase, anemia, hypotension, and pericardial tamponade (n = 1 each). The most common AEs overall were back pain (n = 4), and pain, constipation, dyspnea, decreased neutrophil count, and proteinuria (n = 3 each).
References
- Soeung M, Yan X, Zanca C, et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab induce hyper-progression in renal medullary carcinoma: results of a phase II trial and preclinical evidence. Nature Communications. 2025;16(1). doi:10.1038/s41467-025-65462-z
- FDA approves nivolumab plus ipilimumab combination for intermediate or poor-risk advanced renal cell carcinoma. FDA. April 16, 2018. Accessed January 27, 2026. https://www.fda.gov/drugs/resources-information-approved-drugs/fda-approves-nivolumab-plus-ipilimumab-combination-intermediate-or-poor-risk-advanced-renal-cell