Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22855171›Full record

ArticleClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2013

Multicenter validation of two nomograms to predict non-sentinel node involvement in breast cancer.

Antonio Piñero, Manuel Canteras, Arancha Moreno, Francisco Vicente, Julia Giménez, Ana Tocino, Edelmiro Iglesias, Sergi Vidal-Sicart, Luzdivina Santamaría, Miguel Lorenzo and 3 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyValidation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. 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

13 authors.

Antonio PiñeroDepartment of General Surgery, Virgen de la Arrixaca University Hospital, 30120, Murcia, Spain. antonio.pinero@carm.es
Manuel Canteras
Arancha Moreno
Francisco Vicente
Julia Giménez
Ana Tocino
Edelmiro Iglesias
Sergi Vidal-Sicart
Luzdivina Santamaría
Miguel Lorenzo
Manuel García
Diego Ramirez
Members of the Group for Senologic Studies of the Spanish Society of Senology

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionNomograms are used to predict the involvement of non-sentinel nodes (nSN) in breast cancer. This study attempts to externally validate two of the more commonly used nomograms (MSKCC and Stanford University). MATERIALS AND

methodsFive hundred and one cases of positive SNB with posterior axillary lymphadenectomy from 11 Spanish hospitals with widespread experience of the technique were studied. In all cases, an estimate of the probability of nSN involvement was made using the MSKCC and the Stanford University nomograms. Discrimination was assessed by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. To assess the calibration of the nomogram, observed probability was plotted against the nomogram-calculated predicted probability.

resultsThe overall predictive accuracy of the MSKCC nomogram was 0.684 (95 % confidence interval, 0.635-0.732), while in the case of that from Stanford the predictive accuracy was 0.658 (95 % confidence interval 0.607-0.709). The mean predicted probability of nSN metastases in each group of patients was correlated with the observed probability with an acceptable concordance (r = 0.820; p < 0.004 in MSKCC nomogram and r = 0.888; p < 0.001 in Stanford nomogram).

conclusionThese nomograms can be useful tools in the evaluation of patients with breast cancer and positive sentinel nodes but other factors, including a comprehensive clinical assessment, must be used to decide the most appropriate surgical approach for an individual patient, especially with regard to avoiding unnecessary lymphadenectomy.

Indexed as

NomogramsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overArea Under CurveBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansLymphatic MetastasisMiddle AgedROC CurveSentinel Lymph Node Biopsy

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.