Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29440932›Full record

ArticleCancer management and research2018

Comparison of prognostic prediction between nomogram based on lymph node ratio and AJCC 8th staging system for patients with resected pancreatic head carcinoma: a SEER analysis.

Ning Pu, Jianang Li, Yaolin Xu, Wanling Lee, Yuan Fang, Xu Han, Guochao Zhao, Lei Zhang, Abulimiti Nuerxiati, Hanlin Yin and 2 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer management and research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  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

12 authors.

Ning PuDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Jianang LiDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Yaolin XuDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Wanling LeeDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Yuan FangDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Xu HanDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Guochao ZhaoDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Lei ZhangDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Abulimiti NuerxiatiDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Hanlin YinDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Wenchuan WuDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.
Wenhui LouDepartment of General Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, People's Republic of China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe prognosis of pancreatic carcinoma (PC) remains poor and the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 8th staging system for survival prediction in PC patients after curative resection is still limited. Thus, the aim of this study is to refine a valuable prognostic model and novel staging system for PC with curative resection.

methodsThe data of 3,458 patients used in this study were retrieved from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database registry of National Cancer Institute. The prognostic value of lymph node ratio (LNR) was analyzed in the primary cohort and prognostic nomogram based on the LNR was established to create a novel staging system. Then, analyses were conducted to evaluate the application of the formulated nomogram staging system and the AJCC 8th staging system. The predictive performance of model was further validated in the internal validation cohort.

resultsSignificant positive correlations were found between LNR and all factors except for surgical procedures. The results of univariate and multivariate analyses showed that LNR was identified as an independent prognostic indicator for overall survival (OS) in both primary and validation cohorts (all

conclusionLNR can be considered as a useful independent prognostic indicator for PC patients after curative resection regardless of the surgical procedures. Compared with the AJCC 8th staging system, the formulated nomogram showed superior predictive accuracy for OS and its novel staging system revealed better risk stratification.

Indexed as

AJCCdecision curve analysislymph node rationomogrampancreatic head carcinomaprognosis

Identifiers

PMID29440932
PMCPMC5804271

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.