ArticleCancer medicine2021
Validity of the prognostication tool PREDICT version 2.2 in Japanese breast cancer patients.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validation of the postoperative prognostication tool PREDICT version 2.2 and 3.0 using data from the National cancer center hospital in Japan.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2026Article
- Validation of PREDICT tool v2.2 in patients with early-stage breast cancer enrolled in the GIM and MIG trials.ESMO open · 2026Article
- PREDICT breast v4.0: an update to the PREDICT breast prognostic model.BMC research notes · 2025Article
- Machine learning approaches for predicting 5-year breast cancer survival: A multicenter study.Cancer science · 2023Article
- Validation of PREDICT Version 2.2 in a Retrospective Cohort of Indian Women With Operable Breast Cancer.JCO global oncology · 2023Article
- A Comparison between the Online Prognostic Tool PREDICT and myBeST for Women with Breast Cancer in Malaysia.Cancers · 2023Article
- The Application and Comparison of Machine Learning Models for the Prediction of Breast Cancer Prognosis: Retrospective Cohort Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2022Article
- A scoping review of interactive and personalized web-based clinical tools to support treatment decision making in breast cancer.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2022Article
- Validation of the online PREDICT tool in a cohort of early breast cancer in Brazil.Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologica · 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPREDICT is a prognostication tool that calculates the potential benefit of various postsurgical treatments on the overall survival (OS) of patients with nonmetastatic invasive breast cancer. Once patient, tumor, and treatment details have been entered, the tool will show the estimated 5-, 10-, and 15-year OS outcomes, both with and without adjuvant therapies. This study aimed to conduct an external validation of the prognostication tool PREDICT version 2.2 by evaluating its predictive accuracy of the 5- and 10-year OS outcomes among female patients with nonmetastatic invasive breast cancer in Japan.
methodsAll female patients diagnosed from 2001 to 2013 with unilateral, nonmetastatic, invasive breast cancer and had undergone surgical treatment at Kyushu University Hospital, Fukuoka, Japan, were selected. Observed and predicted 5- and 10-year OS rates were analyzed for the validation population and the subgroups. Calibration and discriminatory accuracy were assessed using Chi-squared goodness-of-fit test and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).
resultsA total of 636 eligible cases were selected from 1, 213 records. Predicted and observed OS differed by 0.9% (p = 0.322) for 5-year OS, and 2.4% (p = 0.086) for 10-year OS. Discriminatory accuracy results for 5-year (AUC = 0.707) and 10-year (AUC = 0.707) OS were fairly well.
conclusionPREDICT tool accurately estimated the 5- and 10-year OS in the overall Japanese study population. However, caution should be used for interpretation of the 5-year OS outcomes in patients that are ≥65 years old, and also for the 10-year OS outcomes in patients that are ≥65 years old, those with histologic grade 3 and Luminal A tumors, and in those considering ETx or no systemic treatment.
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.