ArticleMedicine2015
A Simple Risk Model to Predict Survival in Patients With Carcinoma of Unknown Primary Origin.
Article in Medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
- Cancer of Unknown Primary: When Imaging, Pathology, and Molecular Biology Do Not Match.Case reports in oncologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Carcinoma of unknown primary origin (CUP) is characterized by diverse histological subtypes and clinical presentations, ranging from clinically indolent to frankly aggressive behaviors. This study aimed to identify prognostic factors of CUP and to develop a simple risk model to predict survival in a cohort of Asian patients.We retrospectively reviewed 190 patients diagnosed with CUP between 2007 and 2012 at a single medical center in Taiwan. The clinicopathological parameters and outcomes of our cohort were analyzed. A risk model was developed using multivariate logistic regression and a prognostic score was generated.The prognostic score was calculated based on 3 independent prognostic variables: the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scale (0 points if the score was 1, 2 points if it was 2-4), visceral organ involvement (0 points if no involvement, 1 point if involved), and the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (0 points if ≤3, 1 point if >3). Patients were stratified into good (score 0), intermediate (score 1-2), and poor (score 3-4) prognostic groups based on the risk model. The median survival (95% confidence interval) was 1086 days (500-1617, n = 42), 305 days (237-372, n = 75), and 64 days (44-84, n = 73) for the good, intermediate, and poor prognostic groups, respectively. The c-statistics using the risk model and ECOG scale for the outcome of 1-year mortality were 0.80 and 0.70 (P = 0.038), respectively.In this study, we developed a simple risk model that accurately predicted survival in patients with CUP. This scoring system may be used to help patients and clinicians determine appropriate treatments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.