ArticleSeminars in oncology
External validation of a prognostic model for mortality among patients with non-small-cell lung cancer using the Veterans Precision Oncology Data Commons.
Article in Seminars in oncology. 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.
- Building Research Infrastructure to Develop Greater Learning Efficiencies (BRIDGE).Studies in health technology and informatics · 2024Article
- The Veterans Affairs Precision Oncology Data Repository, a Clinical, Genomic, and Imaging Research Database.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is wide interest in developing prognostic models in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) due to the heterogeneity of the disease. Models developed at other healthcare institutions may not be directly applicable for patients treated at the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). External validation of a candidate prognostic model among VA patients would be crucial before it can be implemented to aid clinical decision-making.
methodsA prognostic model for mortality developed in the Military Health System (MHS) was applied to data from the VA Precision Oncology Data Repository (VA-PODR), which is available to researchers inside and outside the VA at the Veterans Precision Oncology Data Commons (VPODC). Measures of discrimination and calibration were calculated for the MHS model. The MHS model was also refitted in VA-PODR data using the same risk factors to compare the effect of specific factors and predictive performance when the model is developed using VA data.
resultsTime-dependent AUC of the MHS prognostic model was 0.788, 0.806, 0.780, and 0.779 for predicting survival at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years following diagnosis, respectively. Significant discrepancies were found between predicted and observed rates of survival, particularly for later years. When the model is refit in VA-PODR data, it achieved cross-validated AUCs of 0.739, 0.773, 0.769, and 0.807 at the same time points, and discrepancies between predicted and observed survival were reduced.
conclusionsValidation of the MHS prognostic model in VA-PODR demonstrates that its discrimination remains strong when applied to VA patients. Nevertheless, further calibration to VA data may be needed to improve its risk estimation performance. This study highlights the utility of VA-PODR and the VPODC as a national resource for developing analytic tools that are well adapted to the Veteran population.
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.