Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36237239›Full record

ArticleTranslational cancer research2022

Prognostic factors and individualized nomograms predicting overall survival in stage IV rectal cancer patients with different metastatic status: a SEER-based study.

Heming Ge, Zhongyi Zhou, Yuqiang Li, Dan Wang, Cenap Güngör

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational cancer research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 31% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Heming GeDepartment of General Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Zhongyi ZhouDepartment of General Surgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
Yuqiang LiDepartment of General Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Dan WangDepartment of General Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Cenap GüngörDepartment of General Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Universität Hamburg · DEUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf · DEXiangya Hospital Central South University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The prognosis of rectal cancer patients with different metastatic status was significantly different. Our aim was to identify prognostic factors for metastatic rectal cancer (mRC) patients with different metastatic status and to construct specific nomograms to predict overall survival (OS). Methods: This study retrospectively analyzed mRC patients from 2010 to 2016 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program database. All patients were ultimately divided into four groups: synchronous liver metastasis, synchronous lung metastasis, synchronous other organs metastasis and synchronous multiple metastases. Univariate and multivariate cox analyses were performed to screen out independent factors for each group. Individualized nomograms were constructed in different metastatic modes. The concordance index (C-index), decision curve analysis (DCA), time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and calibration curve were performed to verify these nomograms. Results: Finally, 10,407 mRC patients were included in this study. Age, tumor grade, surgery of primary tumor, and chemotherapy were identified as common independent prognostic factors for each subgroup (all P<0.05). Other independent prognostic factors specific to each group included radiotherapy and marital status in the liver metastasis group, race, N stage, and the presence or absence of site-specific metastases in the multiple metastases group (all P<0.05). Higher T staging suggested worse OS in the group with liver, lung, and multiple site metastases. Individualized nomograms predicting 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS for each group were constructed by combining all independently significant risk factors in each group. The area under the curve (AUC) values and C-indexes of these nomograms created by each subgroup were greater than 0.7. All calibration curves and DCA curves showed that these nomograms had good clinical application significance. Conclusions: Individualized prognostic nomograms were constructed for mRC patients with different metastatic status based on different prognostic factors. These nomograms presented satisfactory predictive effects, which helps to provide survival assessment and individualized treatment decision-making for mRC patients with different metastatic status.

Indexed as

different metastatic statusMetastatic rectal cancer (mRC)nomogramoverall survival (OS)SEER database

Identifiers

PMID36237239
PMCPMC9552055
OpenAlexW4289540156

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.