Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26098892›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

A TNM Staging System for Nasal NK/T-Cell Lymphoma.

Zheng Yan, Hui-qiang Huang, Xiao-xiao Wang, Yan Gao, Yu-jing Zhang, Bing Bai, Wei Zhao, Wen-qi Jiang, Zhi-ming Li, Zhong-jun Xia and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation StudyPortrait
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. NK-/T-cell lymphomas.Leukemia · 2021
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Zheng YanDepartment of Medical Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Stage Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Hui-qiang HuangDepartment of Medical Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Stage Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Xiao-xiao WangDepartment of Medical Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Stage Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Yan GaoDepartment of Medical Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Stage Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Yu-jing ZhangStage Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Department of Radiation Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Bing BaiDepartment of Medical Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Stage Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Wei ZhaoDepartment of Medical Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Stage Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Wen-qi JiangDepartment of Medical Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Stage Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Zhi-ming LiDepartment of Medical Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Stage Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Zhong-jun XiaStage Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Department of Hematology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Su-xia LinStage Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Department of Pathology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Chuan-miao XieStage Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China; Medical Imaging Department, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South ChinaSun Yat-sen University · CNSun Yat-sen University Cancer Center · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ann Arbor stage has limited utility in the prognostication and treatment decision making in patients with NK/T-cell lymphoma (NKTCL), as NKTCL is almost exclusively extranodal and the majority is localized at presentation for which radiotherapy is the most important treatment and local invasiveness is the most important prognostic factor. In this study, we attempted to establish a TNM (Tumor-Node-Metastasis) staging system for nasal NKTCL (N-NKTCL). The staging rules of other head and neck cancers were used as reference along with the data of our 271 eligible patients. The primary tumor was classified into T1 to T4, and cervical lymph node metastasis was classified into N0 to N2 according to the extent of involvement. Any lesions outside the head and neck were classified as M1. N-NKTCL thereby was classified into four stages: stage I comprised T1-2N0M0; stage II comprised T1-2N1M0 and T3N0M0; stage III comprised T3N1M0, T1-3N2M0, and T4N0-2M0; and stage IV comprised TanyNanyM1. This staging system showed excellent performance in prognosticating survival. In the current series, the 5-year survival rates of patients with stages I, II, III, and IV N-NKTCL were 92%, 64%, 23%, and 0, respectively. Moreover, the predictive value of several currently used factors was abrogated in the presence of the TNM stage. The TNM staging system is highly effective in stratifying tumor burden and survival risk, which may have significant implications in the treatment decision making for patients with N-NKTCL.

Indexed as

HumansKaplan-Meier EstimateLymphatic MetastasisLymphoma, Extranodal NK-T-CellNeoplasm StagingNose NeoplasmsPrognosisRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID26098892
PMCPMC4476596
OpenAlexW1583729953

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.