Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28860457›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2017

Prognostic performance of three lymph node staging schemes for patients with Siewert type II adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction.

Jinming Xu, Jinlin Cao, Luming Wang, Zhitian Wang, Yiqing Wang, Yihua Wu, Wang Lv, Jian Hu

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Laparoscopic-assistedWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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.

Jinming XuDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 310003, China.
Jinlin CaoDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 310003, China.
Luming WangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 310003, China.
Zhitian WangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 310003, China.
Yiqing WangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 310003, China.
Yihua WuDepartment of Toxicology, Zhejiang University School of Public Health, Hangzhou, 310058, China.ORCID 0000-0003-3471-4223
Wang LvDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 310003, China.
Jian HuDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 310003, China. dr_hujian@zju.edu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The prognostic performance of different lymph node staging schemes for adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction (AEG) remains controversial. The objective of the present study was to compare the prognostic efficacy of the number of lymph node metastases (LNMs), the positive lymph node ratio (LNR) and the log odds of positive lymph nodes (LODDS). Patients diagnosed with Siewert type II AEG were included from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Harrell's C-index statistic, Schemper's proportion of explained variation (PEV), the Akaike information criterion (AIC) and restricted cubic spine analyses were adopted to assess the predictive accuracy of LNM, LNR and LODDS. A total of 1302 patients with post-surgery Siewert type II AEG were included. LNM, LNR and LODDS all showed significant prognostic value in the multivariate Cox regression analyses. LODDS performed higher predictive accuracy than LNM and LNR, with relatively higher C-index, higher Schemper's PEV value and lower AIC value. For patients with no nodes involved, LODDS still performed significantly discriminatory utility. LODDS showed more accurate prognostic performance than LNM and LNR for post-surgery Siewert type II AEG, and it could help to detect survival heterogeneity for patients with no positive lymph nodes involved.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaAgedEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophagogastric JunctionFemaleHumansLymphatic MetastasisLymph NodesMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Staging

Identifiers

PMID28860457
PMCPMC5579029

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.