Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36237316›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022

Development and validation of a prognostic nomogram for predicting cancer-specific survival in patients with metastatic clear cell renal carcinoma: A study based on SEER database.

Guangyi Huang, Jie Liao, Songwang Cai, Zheng Chen, Xiaoping Qin, Longhong Ba, Jingmin Rao, Weimin Zhong, Ying Lin, Yuying Liang and 7 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

17 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Guangyi HuangDepartment of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Jie LiaoDepartment of Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Songwang CaiDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Zheng ChenDepartment of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Xiaoping QinDepartment of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Longhong BaDepartment of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Jingmin RaoDepartment of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Weimin ZhongDepartment of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Ying LinDepartment of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Yuying LiangDepartment of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Liwei WeiDepartment of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Jinhua LiDepartment of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Kaifeng DengDepartment of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Xiangyue LiDepartment of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Zexiong GuoDepartment of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Liang WangDepartment of Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
Yumin ZhuoDepartment of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is highly prevalent, prone to metastasis, and has a poor prognosis after metastasis. Therefore, this study aimed to develop a prognostic model to predict the individualized prognosis of patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC). Patients and Methods: Data of 1790 patients with mccRCC, registered from 2010 to 2015, were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. The included patients were randomly divided into a training set (n = 1253) and a validation set (n = 537) based on the ratio of 7:3. The univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used to identify the important independent prognostic factors. A nomogram was then constructed to predict cancer specific survival (CSS). The performance of the nomogram was internally validated by using the concordance index (C-index), calibration plots, receiver operating characteristic curves, net reclassification improvement (NRI), integrated discrimination improvement (IDI), and decision curve analysis (DCA). We compared the nomogram with the TNM staging system. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was applied to validate the application of the risk stratification system. Results: Diagnostic age, T-stage, N-stage, bone metastases, brain metastases, liver metastases, lung metastases, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, surgery, and histological grade were identified as independent predictors of CSS. The C-index of training and validation sets are 0.707 and 0.650 respectively. In the training set, the AUC of CSS predicted by nomogram in patients with mccRCC at 1-, 3- and 5-years were 0.770, 0.758, and 0.757, respectively. And that in the validation set were 0.717, 0.700, and 0.700 respectively. Calibration plots also showed great prediction accuracy. Compared with the TNM staging system, NRI and IDI results showed that the predictive ability of the nomogram was greatly improved, and DCA showed that patients obtained clinical benefits. The risk stratification system can significantly distinguish the patients with different survival risks. Conclusion: In this study, we developed and validated a nomogram to predict the CSS rate in patients with mccRCC. It showed consistent reliability and clinical applicability. Nomogram may assist clinicians in evaluating the risk factors of patients and formulating an optimal individualized treatment strategy.

Indexed as

metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinomanomogramprognosisSurveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)survival analysis

Identifiers

PMID36237316
PMCPMC9552762
OpenAlexW4297384343

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.