Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25942394›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2015

Modification of N staging systems for penile cancer: a more precise prediction of prognosis.

Z-S Li, K Yao, P Chen, B Wang, J-P Chen, Q-W Mi, Y-H Li, Z-W Liu, Z-K Qin, F-J Zhou and 1 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Z-S Li1] Department of Urology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, PR China [2] State Key Laboratory of Oncology in Southern China, Guangzhou, PR China [3] Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, PR China.
K Yao1] Department of Urology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, PR China [2] State Key Laboratory of Oncology in Southern China, Guangzhou, PR China [3] Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, PR China.
P ChenDepartment of Urology, Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumchi, PR China.
B WangDepartment of Urology, Cancer Center of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, PR China.
J-P Chen1] Department of Urology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, PR China [2] State Key Laboratory of Oncology in Southern China, Guangzhou, PR China [3] Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, PR China.
Q-W MiDepartment of Urology, Dong Guan People's Hospital, Guang Dong, PR China.
Y-H Li1] Department of Urology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, PR China [2] State Key Laboratory of Oncology in Southern China, Guangzhou, PR China [3] Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, PR China.
Z-W Liu1] Department of Urology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, PR China [2] State Key Laboratory of Oncology in Southern China, Guangzhou, PR China [3] Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, PR China.
Z-K Qin1] Department of Urology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, PR China [2] State Key Laboratory of Oncology in Southern China, Guangzhou, PR China [3] Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, PR China.
F-J Zhou1] Department of Urology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, PR China [2] State Key Laboratory of Oncology in Southern China, Guangzhou, PR China [3] Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, PR China.
H Han1] Department of Urology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, PR China [2] State Key Laboratory of Oncology in Southern China, Guangzhou, PR China [3] Collaborative Innovation Center of Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, PR China.
Sun Yat-sen University · CNSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center · CNSouthern Medical University · CNGuangzhou Medical University · CNWenzhou Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe tumour-node-metastasis (TNM) classification is the most widely used tool for penile cancer. However, the current system is based on few studies and has been unchanged since 2009. We determined whether a modified pathological N staging system that incorporates the laterality and number of lymph node metastases (LNMs) increases the accuracy of the results in predicting survival compared with the 7th edition of the pathological N staging system of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) for penile cancer.

methodsThe clinical and histopathologic data from 111 patients with penile cancer with LNMs were analysed. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression analyses were used to determine the impact of the clinical and pathological factors on disease-specific survival of these patients. The predictive accuracy was further assessed using the concordance index.

resultsAccording to the 7th edition of the pathological N classification, the 3-year disease-specific survival (DSS) rates for patients with pN1, pN2, and pN3 disease are 89.6%, 65.9%, and 33.6%, respectively (P(N1-N2)=0.030, P(N2-N3)<0.001, P<0.001). Under the modified pathological N category criteria, the 3-year DSS rates for pN1, pN2, and pN3 patients were 90.7%, 60.5%, and 31.4%, respectively (P(N1-N2)=0.005, P(N2-N3)=0.004, P<0.001). In separate multivariate Cox regression models, only modified N stages (hazard ratio: 4.877, 10.895; P=0.018, P<0.001) exhibited independent effects on the outcome. The accuracy of the modified pathological N category was significantly increased.

conclusionsThe modified pathological N staging system is a better reflection of the prognosis of patients with penile cancer. Our study should contribute to the improvement of prognostic stratification and systemic treatment to avoid overtreatment of patients.

Indexed as

PrognosisAdultAgedAged, 80 and overHumansLymphatic MetastasisLymph NodesMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasms, Second PrimaryNeoplasm StagingPenile NeoplasmsProportional Hazards ModelsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID25942394
PMCPMC4647243
OpenAlexW346756244

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.