Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25171093›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Prognostic nomograms for predicting survival and distant metastases in locally advanced rectal cancers.

Junjie Peng, Ying Ding, Shanshan Tu, Debing Shi, Liang Sun, Xinxiang Li, Hongbin Wu, Sanjun Cai

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Nomograms for colorectal cancer: A systematic review.World journal of gastroenterology · 2015
    Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Junjie PengDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China; Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Ying DingDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Shanshan TuDepartment of Statistics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
Debing ShiDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China; Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Liang SunSchool of Science and Technology, Georgia Gwinnett College, Atlanta, Georgia, United States of America.
Xinxiang LiDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China; Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Hongbin WuDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China; Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Sanjun CaiDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China; Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center · CNShanghai Medical College of Fudan University · CNUniversity of Pittsburgh · USGwinnett College · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo develop prognostic nomograms for predicting outcomes in patients with locally advanced rectal cancers who do not receive preoperative treatment. MATERIALS AND

methodsA total of 883 patients with stage II-III rectal cancers were retrospectively collected from a single institution. Survival analyses were performed to assess each variable for overall survival (OS), local recurrence (LR) and distant metastases (DM). Cox models were performed to develop a predictive model for each endpoint. The performance of model prediction was validated by cross validation and on an independent group of patients.

resultsThe 5-year LR, DM and OS rates were 22.3%, 32.7% and 63.8%, respectively. Two prognostic nomograms were successfully developed to predict 5-year OS and DM-free survival rates, with c-index of 0.70 (95% CI = [0.66, 0.73]) and 0.68 (95% CI = [0.64, 0.72]) on the original dataset, and 0.76 (95% CI = [0.67, 0.86]) and 0.73 (95% CI = [0.63, 0.83]) on the validation dataset, respectively. Factors in our models included age, gender, carcinoembryonic antigen value, tumor location, T stage, N stage, metastatic lymph nodes ratio, adjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy. Predicted by our nomogram, substantial variability in terms of 5-year OS and DM-free survival was observed within each TNM stage category.

conclusionsThe prognostic nomograms integrated demographic and clinicopathological factors to account for tumor and patient heterogeneity, and thereby provided a more individualized outcome prognostication. Our individualized prediction nomograms could help patients with preoperatively under-staged rectal cancer about their postoperative treatment strategies and follow-up protocols.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm MetastasisNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNomogramsPrognosisRectal NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesSurvival Analysis

Identifiers

PMID25171093
PMCPMC4149564
OpenAlexW2166767622

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.