ArticleCancer medicine2019
Validation and application of a prognostic model for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer receiving palliative chemotherapy.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Eukaryotic Translation Initiation Factor 3 Subunit B Is a Promoter in the Development and Progression of Pancreatic Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Validation and application of a prognostic model for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer receiving palliative chemotherapy.Cancer medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe previously developed a robust prognostic model (GS model) to predict the survival outcome of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (APC) receiving palliative chemotherapy with gemcitabine plus S-1 (GS). This study aimed to validate the application of the GS model in APC patients receiving chemotherapy other than the GS regimen. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 727 APC patients who received first-line palliative chemotherapy other than the GS regimen between 2010 and 2016 at four institutions in Taiwan. The patients were categorized into three prognostic groups based on the GS model for comparisons of survival outcome, best tumor response, and in-group survival differences with monotherapy or combination therapy.
resultsThe median survival times for the good, intermediate, and poor prognostic groups were 13.4, 8.4, and 4.6 months, respectively. The hazard ratios for the comparisons of intermediate and poor to good prognostic groups were 1.51 (95% confidence interval [CI]), 1.22-1.88, P < .001) and 2.84 (95% CI, 2.34-3.45, P < .001). The best tumor responses with either partial response or stable disease were 57.5%, 40.4%, and 17.2% of patients in the good, intermediate, and poor prognostic groups (P < .001), respectively. For patients in the good prognostic group, first-line chemotherapy with monotherapy and combination therapy had similar median survival times (13.8 vs 12.9 months, P = .26), while combination therapy showed a better median survival time than monotherapy in patients in the intermediate and poor prognostic groups (8.5 vs 8.0 months, P = .038 and 5.7 vs 3.7 months, P = .001, respectively).
conclusionThe results of our study supported the application of the GS model as a general prognostic tool for patients with pancreatic cancer receiving first-line palliative chemotherapy with gemcitabine-based regimens.
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.