ArticleBMC cancer2018
Development and validation of a new predictive model for breast cancer survival in New Zealand and comparison to the Nottingham prognostic index.
Article in BMC cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and validation of a nomogram to assess recurrence risk in young patients with breast cancer based on preoperative serum tumor markers.Gland surgery · 2026Article
- Article
- Development of Predictive Models for Survival among Women with Breast Cancer in Malaysia.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Incorporating progesterone receptor expression into the PREDICT breast prognostic model.European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) · 2022Article
- Combining Molecular, Imaging, and Clinical Data Analysis for Predicting Cancer Prognosis.Cancers · 2022Review
- Time series models show comparable projection performance with joinpoint regression: A comparison using historical cancer data from World Health Organization.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Altona Prognostic Index: A New Prognostic Index for ER-Positive and Her2-Negative Breast Cancer of No Special Type.Cancers · 2021Article
- Development and validation of a web-based calculator to predict individualized conditional risk of site-specific recurrence in nasopharyngeal carcinoma: Analysis of 10,058 endemic cases.Cancer communications (London, England) · 2021Article
- Construction of a Five-Super-Enhancer-Associated-Genes Prognostic Model for Osteosarcoma Patients.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe only available predictive models for the outcome of breast cancer patients in New Zealand (NZ) are based on data in other countries. We aimed to develop and validate a predictive model using NZ data for this population, and compare its performance to a widely used overseas model, the Nottingham Prognostic Index (NPI).
methodsWe developed a model to predict 10-year breast cancer-specific survival, using data collected prospectively in the largest population-based regional breast cancer registry in NZ (Auckland, 9182 patients), and assessed its performance in this data set (internal validation) and in an independent NZ population-based series of 2625 patients in Waikato (external validation). The data included all women with primary invasive breast cancer diagnosed from 1 June 2000 to 30 June 2014, with follow up to death or Dec 31, 2014. We used multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression to assess predictors and to calculate predicted 10-year breast cancer mortality, and therefore survival, probability for each patient. We assessed observed survival by the Kaplan Meier method. We assessed discrimination by the C statistic, and calibration by comparing predicted and observed survival rates for patients in 10 groups ordered by predicted 10-year survival. We compared this NZ model with the Nottingham Prognostic Index (NPI) in this validation data set.
resultsDiscrimination was good: C statistics were 0.84 for internal validity and 0.83 for an independent external validity. For calibration, for both internal and external validity the predicted 10-year survival probabilities in all groups of patients, ordered by predicted survival, were within the 95% confidence intervals (CI) of the observed Kaplan-Meier survival probabilities. The NZ model showed good discrimination even within the prognostic groups defined by the NPI.
conclusionsThese results for the New Zealand model show good internal and external validity, transportability, and potential clinical value of the model, and its clear superiority over the NPI. Further research is needed to assess other potential predictors, to assess the model's performance in specific subgroups of patients, and to compare it to other models, which have been developed in other countries and have not yet been tested in NZ.
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.