ArticleJAMA network open2020
Development and Validation of a Prognostic Survival Model With Patient-Reported Outcomes for Patients With Cancer.
Article in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prognostic value of patient-reported outcomes for survival in patients with advanced lung cancer receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Trial
- Patient-Reported Outcomes Predict Progression-Free Survival of Patients with Advanced Breast Cancer Treated with Abemaciclib.The oncologist · 2021Trial
- A scoping review of palliative care assessment tools.BMC palliative care · 2026Article
- A Prognostic Symptom Model Incorporating Patient-Reported Symptoms for Transplant-Ineligible Patients with Multiple Myeloma.Cancers · 2025Article
- Development and Validation of a Survival Prediction Model for Patients With Pancreatic Cancer.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Use of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Risk Prediction Model Development to Support Cancer Care Delivery: A Scoping Review.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2024Article
- Health-related quality of life and DNA methylation-based aging biomarkers among survivors of childhood cancer.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2024Article
- A Prognostic Survival Model Incorporating Patient-Reported Outcomes for Transplant-Ineligible Patients With Multiple Myeloma.The oncologist · 2024Article
- Patient-reported predictors of postdischarge mortality after cardiac hospitalization.Journal of hospital medicine · 2024Article
- Development and validation of risk of CPS decline (RCD): a new prediction tool for worsening cognitive performance among home care clients in Canada.BMC geriatrics · 2023Article
- Article
- myBeST-A Web-Based Survival Prognostic Tool for Women with Breast Cancer in Malaysia: Development Process and Preliminary Validation Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Comparing machine learning approaches to incorporate time-varying covariates in predicting cancer survival time.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Identification and Prognostication of End-of-Life State Using a Japanese Guideline-Based Diagnostic Method: A Diagnostic Accuracy Study.International journal of general medicine · 2023Article
- Development of Predictive Models for Survival among Women with Breast Cancer in Malaysia.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Patient-reported outcomes predict survival and adverse events following anticancer treatment initiation in advanced HER2-positive breast cancer.ESMO open · 2022Article
- The predictive utility of patient-reported outcomes and performance status for survival in metastatic lung cancer patients treated with chemoimmunotherapy.Translational lung cancer research · 2022Article
- Development and validation of a prediction model of poor performance status and severe symptoms over time in cancer patients (PROVIEW+).Palliative medicine · 2021Article
- Machine Learning Applied to Electronic Health Records: Identification of Chemotherapy Patients at High Risk for Preventable Emergency Department Visits and Hospital Admissions.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2021Article
- Promising Advances in LINC01116 Related to Cancer.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Existing prognostic cancer tools include biological and laboratory variables. However, patients often do not know this information, preventing them from using the tools and understanding their prognosis. Objective: To develop and validate a prognostic survival model for all cancer types that incorporates information on symptoms and performance status over time. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a retrospective, population-based, prognostic study of data from patients diagnosed with cancer from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2015, in Ontario, Canada. Patients were randomly selected for model derivation (60%) and validation (40%). The derivation cohort was used to develop a multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model with baseline characteristics under a backward stepwise variable selection process to predict the risk of mortality as a function of time. Covariates included demographic characteristics, clinical information, symptoms and performance status, and health care use. Model performance was assessed on the validation cohort by C statistics and calibration plots. Data analysis was performed from February 6, 2018, to November 6, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Time to death from diagnosis (year 0) recalculated at each of 4 annual survivor marks after diagnosis (up to year 4). Results: A total of 255 494 patients diagnosed with cancer were identified (135 699 [53.1%] female; median age, 65 years [interquartile range, 55-73 years]). The cohort decreased to 217 055, 184 822, 143 649, and 109 569 patients for each of the 4 years after diagnosis. In the derivation cohort year 0, and the most common cancers were breast (30 855 [20.1%]), lung (19 111 [12.5%]), and prostate (18 404 [12.0%]). A total of 47 614 (31.1%) had stage III or IV disease. The mean (SD) time to death in year 0 was 567 (715) days. After backward stepwise selection in year 0, the following factors were associated with increased risk of death by more than 10%: being hospitalized; having congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or dementia; having moderate to high pain; having worse well-being; having functional status in the transitional or end-of-life phase; having any problems with appetite; receiving end-of-life home care; and living in a nursing home. Model discrimination was high for all models (C statistic: 0.902 [year 0], 0.912 [year 1], 0.912 [year 2], 0.909 [year 3], and 0.908 [year 4]). Conclusions and Relevance: The model accurately predicted changing cancer survival risk over time using clinical, symptom, and performance status data and appears to have the potential to be a useful prognostic tool that can be completed by patients. This knowledge may support earlier integration of palliative care.
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.