ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Prognostic analysis of breast cancer in Xinjiang based on Cox proportional hazards model and two-step cluster method.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To examine the factors that affect the prognosis and survival of breast cancer patients who were diagnosed at the Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University between 2015 and 2021, forecast the overall survival (OS), and assess the clinicopathological traits and risk level of prognosis of patients in various subgroups. Method: First, nomogram model was constructed using the Cox proportional hazards models to identify the independent prognostic factors of breast cancer patients. In order to assess the discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility of the model, additional tools such as the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, calibration curve, and clinical decision curve analysis (DCA) were used. Finally, using two-step cluster analysis (TCA), the patients were grouped in accordance with the independent prognostic factors. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was employed to compare prognostic risk among various subgroups. Result: T-stage, N-stage, M-stage, molecular subtyping, type of operation, and involvement in postoperative chemotherapy were identified as the independent prognostic factors. The nomogram was subsequently constructed and confirmed. The area under the ROC curve used to predict 1-, 3-, 5- and 7-year OS were 0.848, 0.820, 0.813, and 0.791 in the training group and 0.970, 0.898, 0.863, and 0.798 in the validation group, respectively. The calibration curves of both groups were relatively near to the 45° reference line. And the DCA curve further demonstrated that the nomogram has a higher clinical utility. Furthermore, using the TCA, the patients were divided into two subgroups. Additionally, the two groups' survival curves were substantially different. In particular, in the group with the worse prognosis (the majority of patients did not undergo surgical therapy or postoperative chemotherapy treatment), the T-, N-, and M-stage were more prevalent in the advanced, and the total points were likewise distributed in the high score side. Conclusion: For the survival and prognosis of breast cancer patients in Xinjiang, the nomogram constructed in this paper has a good prediction value, and the clustering results further demonstrated that the selected factors were important. This conclusion can give a scientific basis for tailored treatment and is conducive to the formulation of focused treatment regimens for patients in practical practice.
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.