Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19440855›Full record

ArticlePathology oncology research : POR2009

Predicting non-sentinel lymph node status after positive sentinel biopsy in breast cancer: what model performs the best in a Czech population?

Oldrich Coufal, Tomás Pavlík, Pavel Fabian, Rita Bori, Gábor Boross, István Sejben, Róbert Maráz, Jaroslav Koca, Eva Krejcí, Iva Horáková and 8 more

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pathology oncology research : POR, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Sentinel Lymph Nodes for Breast Carcinoma: A Paradigm Shift.Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine · 2016
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Consensus on the regional lymph nodes irradiation in breast cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2013
    Review
  18. Multicenter validation of two nomograms to predict non-sentinel node involvement in breast cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2013
    Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Oldrich CoufalDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Masaryk Memorial Cancer Institute, Zluty kopec 7, 65653, Brno, Czech Republic. oldrich.coufal@gmail.com
Tomás Pavlík
Pavel Fabian
Rita Bori
Gábor Boross
István Sejben
Róbert Maráz
Jaroslav Koca
Eva Krejcí
Iva Horáková
Vendula Foltinová
Pavlína Vrtelová
Vojtech Chrenko
Wolde Eliza Tekle
Mária Rajtár
Mihály Svébis
Vuk Fait
Gábor Cserni

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several models have previously been proposed to predict the probability of non-sentinel lymph node (NSLN) metastases after a positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy in breast cancer. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of two previously published nomograms (MSKCC, Stanford) and to develop an alternative model with the best predictive accuracy in a Czech population. In the basic population of 330 SLN-positive patients from the Czech Republic, the accuracy of the MSKCC and the Stanford nomograms was tested by the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC). A new model (MOU nomogram) was proposed according to the results of multivariate analysis of relevant clinicopathologic variables. The new model was validated in an independent test population from Hungary (383 patients). In the basic population, six of 27 patients with isolated tumor cells (ITC) in the SLN harbored additional NSLN metastases. The AUCs of the MSKCC and Stanford nomograms were 0.68 and 0.66, respectively; for the MOU nomogram it reached 0.76. In the test population, the AUC of the MOU nomogram was similar to that of the basic population (0.74). The presence of only ITC in SLN does not preclude further nodal involvement. Additional variables are beneficial when considering the probability of NSLN metastases. In the basic population, the previously published nomograms (MSKCC and Stanford) showed only limited accuracy. The developed MOU nomogram proved more suitable for the basic population, such as for another independent population from a mid-European country.

Indexed as

NomogramsSentinel Lymph Node BiopsyAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAlgorithmsBreast NeoplasmsCzech RepublicFemaleHumansLymphatic MetastasisMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsROC Curve

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.