Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32152465›Full record

ArticleLeukemia2021

Validation of nomogram-revised risk index and comparison with other models for extranodal nasal-type NK/T-cell lymphoma in the modern chemotherapy era: indication for prognostication and clinical decision-making.

Si-Ye Chen, Yong Yang, Shu-Nan Qi, Ying Wang, Chen Hu, Xia He, Li-Ling Zhang, Gang Wu, Bao-Lin Qu, Li-Ting Qian and 21 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Leukemia, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 79 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
79citing papers in PubMed
12.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

79 citing papers in PubMed, 128 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Prognostic value of lesion dissemination onQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026
    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. Prognostic value of the pre-treatment SUVmax ofCancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025
    Article

19 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

31 authors at 20 institutions in 3 countries.

Si-Ye Chen *National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, PR China.
Yong Yang *National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, PR China.
Shu-Nan Qi *National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, PR China.
Ying WangChongqing University Cancer Hospital & Chongqing Cancer Hospital, Chongqing, PR China.
Chen HuDivision of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, 21205-2013, USA.
Xia HeJiangsu Cancer Hospital & Jiangsu Institute of Cancer Research, Nanjing, Jiangsu, PR China.
Li-Ling ZhangUnion Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, PR China.
Gang WuUnion Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, PR China.
Bao-Lin QuThe General Hospital of Chinese People's Liberation Army, Beijing, PR China.
Li-Ting QianThe Affiliated Provincial Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, PR China.
Xiao-Rong HouPeking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, PR China.
Fu-Quan ZhangPeking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, PR China.
Xue-Ying QiaoThe Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, PR China.
Hua WangThe Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University, Nanchang, PR China.
Gao-Feng LiBeijing Hospital, National Geriatric Medical Center, Beijing, PR China.
Yu-Jing ZhangState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center; Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, PR China.
Yuan ZhuZhejiang Cancer Hospital, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, PR China.
Jian-Zhong CaoShanxi Cancer Hospital and the Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, Shanxi, PR China.
Sheng-Min LanShanxi Cancer Hospital and the Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan, Shanxi, PR China.
Jun-Xin WuFujian Provincial Cancer Hospital, Fuzhou, Fujian, PR China.
Tao WuAffiliated Hospital of Guizhou Medical University, Guizhou Cancer Hospital, Guiyang, Guizhou, PR China.
Su-Yu ZhuHunan Cancer Hospital and the Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Xiangya School of Medicine, Changsha, Hunan, PR China.
Mei ShiXijing Hospital of Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, PR China.
Li-Ming XuTianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, PR China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9523-9062
Zhi-Yong YuanTianjin Medical University Cancer Institute & Hospital, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, National Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin, PR China.
Joachim YahalomMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Richard TsangPrincess Margaret Hospital, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Yu-Qin SongKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, PR China.
Jun ZhuKey Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, PR China.
Hang SuThe Fifth Medical Center of PLA General Hospital, Beijing, PR China. suhang307@126.com.
Ye-Xiong LiNational Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences (CAMS) and Peking Union Medical College (PUMC), Beijing, PR China. yexiong@yahoo.com.
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNPeking University · CNShanxi Medical University · CNTianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital · CNWuhan Union Hospital · CNAnhui Medical University · CNBeijing Hospital · CNChinese People's Liberation Army · CNChinese PLA General Hospital · CNChongqing University · CNFujian Provincial Cancer Hospital · CNGuiyang Medical University · CNHebei Medical University · CNHunan Cancer Hospital · CNJiangsu Cancer Hospital · CNJohns Hopkins University · USMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · USNanchang University · CNSun Yat-sen University · CNUniversity Health Network · CA

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Derived from our original nomogram study by using the risk variables from multivariable analyses in the derivation cohort of 1383 patients with extranodal NK/T-cell lymphoma, nasal-type (ENKTCL) who were mostly treated with anthracycline-based chemotherapy, we propose an easily used nomogram-revised risk index (NRI), validated it and compared with Ann Arbor staging, the International Prognostic Index (IPI), Korean Prognostic Index (KPI), and prognostic index of natural killer lymphoma (PINK) for overall survival (OS) prediction by examining calibration, discrimination, and decision curve analysis in a validation cohort of 1582 patients primarily treated with non-anthracycline-based chemotherapy. The calibration of the NRI showed satisfactory for predicting 3- and 5-year OS in the validation cohort. The Harrell's C-index and integrated Brier score (IBS) of the NRI for OS prediction demonstrated a better performance than that of the Ann Arbor staging system, IPI, KPI, and PINK. Decision curve analysis of the NRI also showed a superior outcome. The NRI is a promising tool for stratifying patients with ENKTCL into risk groups for designing clinical trials and for selecting appropriate individualized treatment.

Indexed as

Clinical Decision-MakingNomogramsAdultAgedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsArea Under CurveDisease ManagementFemaleHumansLymphoma, Extranodal NK-T-CellMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm GradingNeoplasm StagingPrognosisReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID32152465
PMCPMC7787971
OpenAlexW3009600316

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.