ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal oncology2021
Prognosis prediction model for a special entity of gastric cancer, linitis plastica.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Genomic Signatures of Linitis Plastica Signal the Entrance into a New Era: Novel Approaches for Diagnosis and Treatment.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGastric linitis plastica (GLP) is characteristic by its poor prognosis and highly aggressive characteristics compared with other types of gastric cancer (GC). However, the guidelines have not yet been distinguished between GLP and non-GLP.
methodsA total of 342 eligible patients with GLP identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) dataset were randomly divided into training set (n=298) and validation set (n=153). A nomogram would be developed with the constructed predicting model based on the training cohort's data, and the validation cohort would be used to validate the model. Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to evaluate the differences between groups. Cox regression and LASSO (least absolute shrinkage and selection operator) were used to construct the models. Calibration curve, time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, concordance index (C-index) and decision curve analysis (DCA) were used to evaluate the predicting performance. Restricted mean survival time (RMST) was used to analyze the curative effect of adjuvant therapy.
resultsFor patients in training cohort, univariable and multivariable Cox analyses showed that age, examined lymph nodes (LN.E), positive lymph nodes (LN.P), lesion size, combined resection, and radiotherapy are independent prognostic factors for overall survival (OS), while chemotherapy can not meet the proportional hazards (PHs) assumption; age, race, lesion size, LN.E, LN.P, combined resection and marital status are independent prognostic factors for cancer-specific survival (CSS). The C-index of the nomogram was 0.678 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.660-0.696] and 0.673 (95% CI, 0.630-0.716) in the training and validation cohort, respectively. Meanwhile, the C-index of the CSS nomogram was 0.671 (95% CI, 0.653-0.699) and 0.650 (95% CI, 0.601-0.691) in the training and validation cohort for CSS, respectively. Furthermore, the nomogram was well calibrated with satisfactory consistency. RMST analysis further determined that chemotherapy and radiotherapy might be beneficial for improving 1- and 3-year OS and CSS, but not the 5-year CSS.
conclusionsWe developed nomograms to help predict individualized prognosis for GLP patients. The new model might help guide treatment strategies for patients with GLP.
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.