ArticleCancer management and research2021
Predicting Survival for Patients with Malignant Pleural Effusion: Development of the CONCH Prognostic Model.
Article in Cancer management and research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic value of monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) in malignant pleural effusion: A cross-sectional study.Lung India : official organ of Indian Chest Society · 2025Article
- Assessment of a Large-Scale Unbiased Malignant Pleural Effusion Proteomics Study of a Real-Life Cohort.Cancers · 2022Article
- Survival analysis and development of a prognostic nomogram for patients with malignant mesothelioma in different anatomic sites.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Novel 3D organotypic co-culture model of pleura.PloS one · 2022Article
- Total Protein-Chloride Ratio in Pleural Fluid Independently Predicts Overall Survival in Malignant Pleural Effusion at the First Diagnosis.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMalignant pleural effusion (MPE) is a frequent complication of advanced malignancies that leads to a poor quality of life and limits treatment options.
objectiveThe objective of this study was to identify biomarkers of survival in patients with MPE, which will greatly facilitate the clinical management of this complication.
methodsThis retrospective study recruited patients who had been pathologically diagnosed with MPE, regardless of the type of primary cancer, at Beijing Chao-Yang Hospital over 158 months. Demographic, clinical, hematological, and pleural fluid data were collected and analyzed as potential predictors of survival, and a new predictive model was developed based on Cox and logistic regression analyses.
resultsIn our alternative prognostic model (n = 281), four routinely detected variables, namely, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level, monocyte count, N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-pro-BNP) level, and pleural effusion chloride level on admission, were identified as predictors (the CONCH prognostic score). Patients were divided into three prognosis subgroups based on risk stratification, with median survival periods of 17, 11, and 5 months, respectively. In comparison with the low-risk group, patients in the medium- and high-risk groups showed significantly poorer survival (medium-risk group: hazard ratio [HR], 1.586; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.047-2.402; P = 0.029; high-risk group: HR, 4.389; 95% CI, 2.432-7.921; P < 0.001).
conclusionFour routinely detected variables were used to develop the CONCH scoring system, which was confirmed to be an accurate prognostic score for patients with MPE. This system can guide the selection of interventions and management for MPE.
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.