ArticleMedicine2020
Establishing a novel prognostic tool for Ewing sarcoma patients: Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database analysis.
Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic Modeling for Bone Sarcomas Based on a Large Prospective Cohort From a Tertiary Care Cancer Center in India.JCO global oncology · 2025Article
- The development and external validation of a web-based nomogram for predicting overall survival with Ewing sarcoma in children.Journal of children's orthopaedics · 2024Article
- The Clinical Characteristics, Risk Classification System, and Web-Based Nomogram for Primary Spinal Ewing Sarcoma: A Large Population-Based Cohort Study.Global spine journal · 2023Article
- Development and validation of a prognostic score at baseline diagnosis for Ewing sarcoma family of tumors: a retrospective single institution analysis of 860 patients.American journal of translational research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients diagnosed with Ewing sarcoma (ES) usually experience poor outcomes. Accurate prediction of ES patients' prognosis is essential to improve their survival. Given that ES is a relatively rare tumor with a low incidence, we aim at developing a prognostic nomogram of ES patients based on a large sample analysis.We used the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to screen eligible patients diagnosed ES of bone. This retrospective study presented the clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis of ES. We randomly assigned all ES patients to 2 sets (training set and validation set) with an equal number of patients. In order to identify independent factors of survival, we performed univariate and multivariate Cox analysis in the training set. Then, we constructed novel nomograms to predict survival of ES patients by integrating significant independent variables from the training set. The prognostic performance of constructed nomograms was examined using concordance index (C-index) and calibration curves in both training and validation set.We included a total of 988 eligible cases diagnosed ES of bone between 2000 and 2015. Age >18 years, distant metastasis, tumor size >10 cm, and no surgery were independent risk factors for poorer survival. Our survival prediction nomograms were established based on those 4 independent risk factors. Good calibration plots were achieved in internal and external validation. The internal validation C-indexes of the nomogram for overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were 0.733 and 0.737, respectively. Similar good results were also achieved in external validation setting.The established nomograms show good performance and allow for better evaluating the prognosis of ES patients and recommending appropriate instructions.
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.