Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34554237›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2021

Epidemiologic Trends of and Factors Associated With Overall Survival for Patients With Gastroenteropancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors in the United States.

Zihan Xu, Li Wang, Shuang Dai, Mingjing Chen, Feng Li, Jianguo Sun, Feng Luo

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 176 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
176citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
23.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

176 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 238 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Dosimetry Results from the Phase 1b/3 ACTION-1 Trial of [Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2026
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. [EClinicalMedicine · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

116 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Zihan XuLung Cancer Center, Cancer Center and State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Li WangLung Cancer Center, Cancer Center and State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Shuang DaiLung Cancer Center, Cancer Center and State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Mingjing ChenCancer Institute of People's Liberation Army, Xinqiao Hospital, Army Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China.
Feng LiCancer Institute of People's Liberation Army, Xinqiao Hospital, Army Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China.
Jianguo SunCancer Institute of People's Liberation Army, Xinqiao Hospital, Army Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China.
Feng LuoLung Cancer Center, Cancer Center and State Key Laboratory of Biotherapy, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China.
Sichuan University · CNWest China Hospital of Sichuan University · CNXinqiao Hospital · CNArmy Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Although the incidence and prevalence of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs) have been thought to have increased during the past decades, updated epidemiologic and survival data are lacking. Objectives: To conduct an epidemiologic and survival analysis of the largest cohort of patients with GEP-NETs using the latest data and to establish a novel nomogram to predict the survival probability of individual patients with GEP-NETs. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, 43 751 patients with GEP-NETs diagnosed from January 1, 1975, to December 31, 2015, were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. Associated data were used for epidemiologic and survival analysis, as well as the establishment and validation of a nomogram to predict the survival probability of individual patients with GEP-NETs. The study cutoff date was December 31, 2018. Statistical analysis was performed from February 1 to April 30, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Incidence, factors associated with overall survival, and a nomogram model for patients with GEP-NETs. Results: A total of 43 751 patients received a diagnosis of GEP-NETs from 1975 to 2015 (22 398 women [51.2%], 31 976 White patients [73.1%], 7097 Black patients [16.2%], 3207 Asian and Pacific Islander patients [7.3%], 270 American Indian and Alaska Native patients [0.6%], and 4546 patients of unknown race [10.4%]; mean [SD] age at diagnosis, 58 [15] years). The age-adjusted incidence rate of GEP-NETs increased 6.4-fold from 1975 to 2015 (annual percentage change [APC], 4.98; 95% CI, 4.75-5.20; P < .001). Furthermore, among site groups, the incidence of GEP-NETs in the rectum increased most significantly (APC, 6.43; 95% CI, 5.65-7.23; P < .001). As for stage and grade, the incidence increased the most in localized GEP-NETs (APC, 6.53; 95% CI, 6.08-6.97; P < .001) and G1 GEP-NETs (APC, 18.93; 95% CI, 17.44-20.43; P < .001). During the study period, the mean age at diagnosis for localized disease increased by 9.0 years (95% CI, 3.3-14.7 years; P = .002), which remained unchanged for regional and distant cases. On multivariable analyses, age, sex, marital status, and tumor size, grade, stage, and site were significantly associated with overall survival for patients with GEP-NETs (eg, patients with distant vs localized disease: hazard ratio, 10.32; 95% CI, 8.56-12.43; G4 vs G1 GEP-NET: hazard ratio, 6.37; 95% CI, 5.39-7.53). Furthermore, a nomogram comprising age, size, grade, stage, and site was established to predict the 3-year and 5-year survival probability, with the concordance indexes of 0.893 (95% CI, 0.883-0.903) for the internal validations and 0.880 (95% CI, 0.866-0.894) for the external validations. The receiver operating characteristic curve demonstrated that the nomogram exhibited better discrimination power than TNM classification (area under the curve for 3-year overall survival, 0.908 vs 0.795; for 5-year overall survival, 0.893 vs 0.791). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the incidence and prevalence of GEP-NETs have continued to increase over 40 years, especially among patients with rectal GEP-NETs. In addition, this study suggests that a nomogram with 5 prognostic parameters may accurately quantify the risk of death among patients with GEP-NETs, indicating that it has satisfactory clinical practicality.

Indexed as

NomogramsAdolescentAdultAgedFemaleHumansIncidenceIntestinal NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingNeuroendocrine TumorsPancreatic NeoplasmsPredictive Value of TestsPrevalencePrognosis

Identifiers

PMID34554237
PMCPMC8461504
OpenAlexW3201005809

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.