ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2022
External verification and improvement of the Neo-Bioscore staging system in a Chinese cohort.
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Accurately predicting outcomes for patients with breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is critical for clinical decisions. Prognostic models applicable to the Chinese population remain limited. The Neo-Bioscore staging system has been utilized as a predictive model for survival of breast cancer patients after NAC. This study aimed to validate the applicability of Neo-Bioscore in a Chinese population and develop an improved staging system based on it to predict prognosis of Chinese patients more accurately. Methods: This study retrospectively collected clinicopathological and survival data in patients receiving NAC from February 2005 to August 2018 in PLA General Hospital. Discrimination, calibration and clinical usefulness were used to assess model performance. Univariate and multivariate analyses assessed relationships between clinicopathological factors and disease-specific survival. For model modification, postoperative pathological staging in the Neo-Bioscore was substituted with the posttreatment pathological tumor (ypT) stage and posttreatment pathological lymph node (ypN) stage. Neo-Bioscore and Modified Neo-Bioscore were compared with the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system. Results: A total of 436 patients with a median follow-up of 67 months were included. Five-year disease-specific survival (DSS), overall survival, and disease-free survival rates were 88.0%, 87.9%, and 76.8%, respectively. The concordance index (C-index) of the Neo-Bioscore staging system, posttreatment pathological stage (PS), and pretreatment clinical stage (CS) for DSS were 0.78 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.72-0.83], 0.75 (95% CI: 0.69-0.82), and 0.68 (95% CI: 0.62-0.74), respectively. No significant difference between the Neo-Bioscore and PS was observed in the C-index (P=0.399). ypT and ypN were included in Neo-Bioscore to replace PS and create a modified staging system named MNeo-Bioscore. The C-index for DSS of the MNeo-Bioscore was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.78-0.87), and the calibration curve and decision curve analysis (DCA) curve performed well in internal validation. Conclusions: The Neo-Bioscore staging system provided precise prognostic stratification for Chinese breast cancer patients receiving NAC; ypN and ypT stage may be substituted for PS to add significant prognostic value for Neo-Bioscore.
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.