ArticleBioMed research international2022
Development and Verification of Prognostic Nomogram for Penile Cancer Based on the SEER Database.
Article in BioMed research international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Developing and validating a nomogram for penile cancer survival: A comprehensive study based on SEER and Chinese data.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Marital status impacts survival of stage I non-small-cell lung cancer: a propensity-score matching analysis.Future science OA · 2024Article
- Development and verification of prognostic nomogram for ampullary carcinoma based on the SEER database.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: We aimed to establish a prognostic nomogram for penile cancer (PC) patients based on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) database. Methods: Data from 1643 patients between 2010 and 2015 were downloaded and extracted from the SEER database. They were randomly divided into the development group (70%) and the verification group (30%), and then, univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression, respectively, was used to explore the possible risk factors of PC. The factors significantly related to overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were used to establish the nomogram, which was assessed via the concordance index (C-index), receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, and calibration curve. An internal validation was conducted to test the accuracy and effectiveness of the nomogram. Kaplan-Meier calculation was used to predict the further OS and CSS status of these patients. Results: On multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression, the independent prognostic risk factors associated with OS were age, race, marital status, N/M stage, surgery, surgery of lymph nodes, and histologic type, with a moderate C-index of 0.737 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.713-0.760) and 0.766 (95% CI: 0.731-0.801) in the development and verification groups, respectively. The areas under the ROC (AUC) of 3- and 5-year OS were 0.749 and 0.770, respectively. While marital status, N/M stage, surgery, surgery of lymph nodes, and histologic type were significantly linked to PC patients' CSS, which have better C-index of 0.802 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.771-0.833) and 0.82 (95% CI: 0.775-0.865) in the development and verification groups, and the AUC of 3- and 5-year CSS were 0.766 and 0.787. Both of the survival calibration curves of 3- and 5-year OS and CSS brought out a high consistency. Conclusion: Our study produced a satisfactory nomogram revealing the survival of PC patients, which could be helpful for clinicians to assess the situation of PC patients and to implement further treatment.
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.