ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Developing and validating nomograms for predicting the survival in patients with clinical local-advanced gastric cancer.
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 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Many patients with gastric cancer are at a locally advanced stage during initial diagnosis. TNM staging is inaccurate in predicting survival. This study aims to develop two more accurate survival prediction models for patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) and guide clinical decision-making. Methods: We recruited 2794 patients diagnosed with LAGC (2010-2015) from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database and performed external validation using data from 115 patients with LAGC at Yantai Affiliated Hospital of Binzhou Medical University. Univariate and multifactorial survival analyses were screened for meaningful independent prognostic factors and were used to build survival prediction models. Concordance index (C-index), receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA) were evaluated for nomograms. Finally, the differences and relationships of survival and prognosis between the three different risk groups were described using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Cox proportional risk regression model analysis identified independent prognostic factors for patients with LAGC, and variables associated with overall survival (OS) included age, race, marital status, T-stage, N-stage, grade, histologic type, surgery, and chemotherapy. Variables associated with cancer-specific survival (CSS) included age, race, T-stage, N-stage, grade, histological type, surgery, and chemotherapy. In the training cohort, C-index of nomogram for predicting OS was 0.722 (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.708-0.736] and CSS was 0.728 (95% CI: 0.713-0.743). In the external validation cohort, C-index of nomogram for predicted OS was 0.728 (95% CI:0.672-0.784) and CSS was 0.727 (95% CI:0.668-0.786). The calibration curves showed good concordance between the predicted and actual results. C-index, ROC, and DCA results indicated that our nomograms could more accurately predict OS and CSS than TNM staging and had a higher clinical benefit. Finally, to facilitate clinical use, we set up two web servers based on nomograms. Conclusion: The nomograms established in this study have better risk assessment ability than the clinical staging system, which can help clinicians predict the individual survival of LAGC patients more accurately and thus develop appropriate treatment strategies.
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.