Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34584371›Full record

ArticleChinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu2021

Validation and modification of the AJCC 8th TNM staging system for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in a Chinese cohort: A nationwide pancreas data center analysis.

Hao Hu, Chang Qu, Bingjun Tang, Weikang Liu, Yongsu Ma, Yiran Chen, Xuehai Xie, Yan Zhuang, Hongqiao Gao, Xiaodong Tian and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Epidemiology of pancreatic cancer: New version, new vision.Chinese journal of cancer research = Chung-kuo yen cheng yen chiu · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

11 authors.

Hao HuDepartment of General Surgery, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China.
Chang QuDepartment of General Surgery, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China.
Bingjun TangDepartment of General Surgery, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China.
Weikang LiuDepartment of General Surgery, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China.
Yongsu MaDepartment of General Surgery, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China.
Yiran ChenDepartment of General Surgery, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China.
Xuehai XieDepartment of General Surgery, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China.
Yan ZhuangDepartment of General Surgery, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China.
Hongqiao GaoDepartment of General Surgery, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China.
Xiaodong TianDepartment of General Surgery, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China.
Yinmo YangDepartment of General Surgery, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo validate the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in a Chinese cohort of radically resected patients and to develop a refined staging system for PDAC.

methodsData were collected from the China Pancreas Data Center (CPDC) for patients with resected PDAC in 2016 and 2017, and cancer-specific survival (CSS) was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. Univariate and multivariate analyses based on Cox regression were performed to identify prognostic factors. The recursive partitioning analysis (RPA), Kaplan-Meier method, and log-rank test were performed on the training dataset to generate a proposed modification for the 8th TNM staging system utilizing the preoperative carbohydrate antigen (CA)19-9 level. Validation was performed for both staging systems in the validation cohort.

resultsA total of 1,676 PDAC patients were retrieved, and the median CSS was significantly different between the 8th TNM groupings, with no significant difference in survival between stage IB and IIA. The analysis of T and N stages demonstrated a better prognostic value in the N category. Multivariate analysis showed that the preoperative serum CA19-9 level was the strongest prognostic indicator among all the independent risk factors. All patients with CA19-9 >500 U/mL had similar survival, and we proposed a new staging system by combining IB and IIA and stratifying all patients with high CA19-9 into stage III. The modified staging system had a better performance for predicting CSS than the 8th AJCC staging scheme.

conclusionsThe 8th AJCC staging system for PDAC is suitable for a Chinese cohort of resected patients, and the N category has a better prognostic value than the T category. Our modified staging system has superior accuracy in predicting survival than the 8th AJCC TNM staging system.

Indexed as

CA19-9cancer-specific survivalCPDCpancreatic ductal adenocarcinomaprognosisTNM staging

Identifiers

PMID34584371
PMCPMC8435826

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.