Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34123805›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021

Naples Prognostic Score: A Novel Prognostic Score in Predicting Cancer-Specific Survival in Patients With Resected Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

Ji-Feng Feng, Jian-Ming Zhao, Sheng Chen, Qi-Xun Chen

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Ji-Feng FengDepartment of Thoracic Oncological Surgery, Key Laboratory Diagnosis and Treatment Technology on Thoracic Oncology, Institute of Cancer Research and Basic Medical Sciences of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Cancer Hospital of University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Hangzhou, China.
Jian-Ming ZhaoDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, Jinhua Guangfu Hospital, Jinghua, China.
Sheng ChenDepartment of Thoracic Oncological Surgery, Key Laboratory Diagnosis and Treatment Technology on Thoracic Oncology, Institute of Cancer Research and Basic Medical Sciences of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Cancer Hospital of University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Hangzhou, China.
Qi-Xun ChenDepartment of Thoracic Oncological Surgery, Key Laboratory Diagnosis and Treatment Technology on Thoracic Oncology, Institute of Cancer Research and Basic Medical Sciences of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Cancer Hospital of University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Zhejiang Cancer Hospital, Hangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNaples prognostic score (NPS) serves as a new prognostic index based on nutritional and inflammatory status in recent years. The aim of the current study was to explore the prognostic effect of NPS and to develop and validate a reliable nomogram based on NPS for individual cancer-specific survival (CSS) prediction in patients with resected ESCC without neoadjuvant therapy.

methodsThe clinical data for 287 (Jan. 2010 to Jun. 2012, Training sets) and 118 (Jan. 2015 to Dec 2015, Validation sets) consecutive resected ESCC cases were retrospectively analyzed. Two NPS models based on the different cut-off values of parameters were compared. Cut-off values in model 1 were derived from previous published studies, while cut-off values in model 2 were obtained in this study based on receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. The relationships between NPS and clinical characteristics and CSS were analyzed. The prediction model of nomogram was developed with independent prognostic factors in the training sets and was validated in the validation sets.

resultsThe 5-year CSS for NPS 0, 1 and 2 were 61.9%, 34.6% and 13.4% in model 1 and 75.0%, 42.4% and 13.0% in model 2, respectively (P<0.001). Subgroup analyses revealed that NPS was also significantly associated with CSS in both model 1 and model 2 in different TNM stages. Multivariate analyses revealed that NPS was an independent prognostic marker regarding CSS in patients with resected ESCC (P<0.001). A predictive nomogram based on NPS was established and validated. The C-indexes of the nomogram in the training sets and validation sets were 0.68 and 0.72 in model 1 and 0.69 and 0.73 in model 2, respectively. These results confirmed that NPS-based nomogram was a more accurate and effective tool for predicting CSS in patients with resected ESCC.

conclusionThe current study confirmed that NPS was still a useful independent prognostic score in patients with resected ESCC. The NPS-based nomogram was successfully developed and validated, which may contribute to individual CSS prediction for resected ESCC patients.

Indexed as

cancer-specific survivalesophageal squamous cell carcinomalymphocyte to monocyte ratioNaples prognostic scoreneutrophil to lymphocyte ratioprognosis

Identifiers

PMID34123805
PMCPMC8193841

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.