ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Assessment of the Novel, Practical, and Prognosis-Relevant TNM Staging System for Stage I-III Cutaneous Melanoma.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spatial Distribution and Phenotypic Profiling of Cd68Biomedicines · 2025Article
- A pan-cancer analysis of the prognostic and immunological roles of zinc finger protein 514 in human tumors.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Development and validation of a nomogram for incorporatingJournal of thoracic disease · 2024Article
- Identification of thioredoxin-1 as a biomarker of lung cancer and evaluation of its prognostic value based on bioinformatics analysis.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
11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The clinical TNM staging system does not differ between the 7 Methods: Data were accessed from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) open database. We divided the patients into 32 groups based on the T and N categories. The Kaplan-Meier survival curves and treatment guidelines were used to proposed a new TNM staging system. Cox proportional hazards model and 1000-person-years were used to verify accuracy. Results: This retrospective study included 68 861 patients from 2010 to 2015. The new proposed staging system was as follows: stage IA, T1aN0M0; stage IB, T1b/T2aN0M0; stage IIA, T3-4aN0M0 and T2bN0M0; stage IIB, T1-4aN1-2M0 and T3-4bN0M0; and stage III, T1-4aN3M0 and T1-4bN1-3M0. Hazard ratios for the new stages IB, IIA, IIB, and III, with stage IA as reference, were 4.311 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.217-5.778), 8.993 (95% CI: 6.637-12.186), 13.179 (95% CI: 9.435-18.407), and 20.693 (95% CI: 13.655-31.356), respectively (all p-values < 0.001). Cancer-specific mortality rates per 1000-person-years were 0.812 (95% CI: 0.674-0.978), 6.612 (95% CI: 5.936-7.364), 22.228 (95% CI: 20.128-24.547), 50.863 (95% CI: 47.472-54.496) and 120.318 (95% CI: 112.596-128.570) for stages IA, IB, IIA, IIB and III, respectively. Conclusion: We developed a more practical and prognosis-relevant staging system than that of the 8
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.