ArticleCancer medicine2023
Derivation and validation of a risk classification tree for patients with synovial sarcoma.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2023. 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.
- Article
- Molecular and epigenetic oncogenesis in synovial sarcoma: implications for cancer biology, diagnosis and treatment.Oncogene · 2025Review
- Effect of HLA restriction on racial and ethnic disparities in access to immune therapies for advanced synovial sarcoma.The oncologist · 2025Article
- Derivation and validation of a risk classification tree for patients with synovial sarcoma.Cancer medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSynovial sarcoma (SS) accounts for 8%-10% of all soft-tissue sarcomas. Clinical presentation and outcomes vary, yet discrete risk groups based on validated prognostic indices are not defined for the full spectrum of patients with SS.
methodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study using data from the SEER (surveillance, epidemiology, and end results program) database of SS patients who were <70 years of age at diagnosis. We constructed a recursive partitioning model of overall survival using a training cohort of 1063 patients with variables: Age at diagnosis, sex, race, ethnicity, primary site, tumor size, tumor grade, and stage. Based on this model, we grouped patients into three risk groups and estimated 5-year overall survival for each group. We then applied these groups to a test cohort (n = 1063).
resultsOur model identified three prognostic groups with significantly different overall survival: low risk (local/regional stage with either <21 years of age OR tumor <7.5 cm and female sex), intermediate-risk (local/regional stage, age ≥ 21 years with either male sex and tumor <7.5 cm OR any sex with appendicular anatomic location) and high risk (local/regional stage, age ≥ 21 years, tumor size ≥7.5 cm and non-appendicular location OR distant stage). Prognostic groups were applied to the test cohort, showing significantly different survival between groups (p < 0.0001).
conclusionsOur analysis yields an intuitive risk-classification tree with discrete groups, which may provide useful information for researchers, patients, and clinicians. Prospective validation of this model may inform efforts at risk-stratifying 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.