ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Prediction model based on preoperative CT findings for carotid artery invasion in patients with head and neck masses.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To investigate the performance of a model in predicting carotid artery (CA) invasion in patients with head and neck masses using computed tomography (CT). Methods: This retrospective study included patients with head and neck masses who underwent CT and surgery between January 2013 and July 2021. Patient characteristics and ten CT features were assessed by two radiologists. The patients were randomly allocated to a training cohort (n=106) and a validation cohort (n=109). Independent risk factors for CA invasion were assessed by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. The predictive model was established as a nomogram using the training cohort. In addition, the calibration, discrimination, reclassification, and clinical application of the model were assessed in the validation cohort. Results: A total of 215 patients were evaluated, including 54 patients with CA invasion. Vascular wall deformation (odds ratio [OR], 7.17; p=0.02) and the extent of encasement to the CA (OR, 1.02; p<0.001) were independent predictors of CA invasion in the multivariable analysis in the training cohort. The performance of the model was similar between the training and validation cohort, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.93 (95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.88-0.98) and 0.88 (95% CI, 0.80-0.96) (p=0.07), respectively. The calibration curve showed a good agreement between the predicted and actual probabilities. Conclusion: A predictive model for carotid artery invasion can be defined based on features that come from patient characteristics and CT data to help in improve surgical planning and invasion evaluation.
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.