Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33181635›Full record

ArticleMedicine2020

A comprehensive validation of the novel 8th edition of American Joint Committee on Cancer staging manual for the long-term survivals of patients with non-functional pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms.

Min Yang, Lin Zeng, Wen-Qing Yao, Neng-Wen Ke, Chun-Lu Tan, Bo-le Tian, Xu-Bao Liu, Bo Xiang, Yi Zhang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Prognostic value of CT-based radiomics in grade 1-2 pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Min YangDepartment of Pediatric Surgery.
Lin ZengPresident & Dean's Office.
Wen-Qing YaoDepartment of Pathology.
Neng-Wen KeDepartment of Pancreatic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, the People's Republic of China.
Chun-Lu TanDepartment of Pancreatic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, the People's Republic of China.
Bo-le TianDepartment of Pancreatic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, the People's Republic of China.
Xu-Bao LiuDepartment of Pancreatic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, the People's Republic of China.
Bo XiangDepartment of Pediatric Surgery.
Yi ZhangDepartment of Pancreatic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan Province, the People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0003-3641-0629
Office of the Director · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Histologically, the World Health Organization has classified pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (p-NENs) into well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (G1/G2 p-NETs) and poorly-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma (G3 p-NECs) based on tumor mitotic counts and Ki-67 index. Recently, the 8th edition of American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging manual has incorporated some major changes in 2017 that the TNM staging system for p-NENs should only be applied to well-differentiated G1/G2 p-NETs, while poorly-differentiated G3 p-NECs be classified according to the new system for pancreatic exocrine adenocarcinomas. However, this new manual for p-NENs has seldom been evaluated.Data of patients with both G1/G2 and G3 non-functional p-NENs (NF-p-NENs) from our institution was retrospectively collected and analyzed using 2 new AJCC 8th staging systems. We also made survival comparisons between the 8th and 7th edition system separately for different subgroups.For G1/G2 NF-p-NETs, there were 52 patients classified in AJCC 8th edition stage I, 40 in stage II, 41 in stage III and 19 in stage IV. As for G3 NF-p-NECs, 17, 19, 24, and 18 patients were respectively defined from AJCC 8th edition stage I to stage IV. In terms of the AJCC 7th staging system, the 230 patients with NF-p-NENs were totally distributed from stage I to stage IV (94, 63, 36, 37, respectively). For the survival analysis of both G1/G2 NF-p-NETs and G3 NF-p-NECs, the AJCC 7th edition system failed to discriminate the survival differences when compared stage III with stage II or stage IV (P > .05), while the 8th edition ones could perfectly allocate patients into 4 statistically different groups (P < .05). The HCIs of AJCC 8th stage for G1/G2 NF-p-NETs [HCI=0.658, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.602-0.741] and stage for G3 NF-p-NECs (HCI=0.704, 95% CI=0.595-0.813) was both statistically larger than those of AJCC 7th stage for different grading NF-p-NENs [(HCI=0.578, 95% CI=0.557-0.649; P=.031), (HCI=0.546, 95% CI=0.531-0.636; P = .019); respectively], indicating a more accurate predictive ability for the survivals of NF-p-NENs.Our data suggested the 2 new AJCC 8th staging systems were superior to its 7th edition for patients with both G1/G2 NF-p-NETs and G3 NF-p-NECs.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMedical OncologyMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingNeuroendocrine CellsPancreatic NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesTextbooks as TopicUnited States

Identifiers

PMID33181635
PMCPMC7668515
OpenAlexW3098410633

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.