Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36934429›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2023

Prognostic risk factor of major salivary gland carcinomas and survival prediction model based on random survival forests.

Yufan Chen, Guoli Li, Wenmei Jiang, Rong Cheng Nie, Honghao Deng, Yingle Chen, Hao Li, Yanfeng Chen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yufan ChenState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, China.ORCID 0000-0002-2562-5651
Guoli LiState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, China.
Wenmei JiangState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, China.
Rong Cheng NieState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, China.
Honghao DengState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, China.
Yingle ChenState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, China.
Hao LiState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, China.
Yanfeng ChenState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Guangzhou, China.
Sun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Salivary gland malignancies are rare and are often acompanied by poor prognoses. So, identifying the populations with risk factors and timely intervention to avoid disease progression is significant. This study provides an effective prediction model to screen the target patients and is helpful to construct a cost-effective follow-up strategy. We enrolled 249 patients diagnosed with salivary gland tumors and analyzed prognostic risk factors using Cox proportional hazard univariable and multivariable regression models. The patients' data were split into training and validation sets on a 7:3 ratio, and the random survival forest (RSF) model was established using the training sets and validated using the validation sets. The maximally selected rank statistics method was used to determine a cut point value corresponding to the most significant relation with survival. Univariable Cox regression suggested age, smoking, alcohol consumption, untreated, neural invasion, capsular invasion, skin invasion, tumors larger than 4 cm, advanced T and N stage, distant metastasis, and non-mucous cell carcinoma were risk factors for poor prognosis, and multivariable analysis suggested that female, aging, smoking, untreated, and non-mucous cell carcinoma were risk factors. The time-dependent ROC curve showed the AUC of the RSF prediction model on 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival were 0.696, 0.779, and 0.765 respectively in the validation sets. Log-rank tests suggested that the cut point 7.42 risk score calculated from the RSF was most effective in dividing patients with significantly different prognoses. The prediction model based on the RSF could effectively screen patients with poor prognoses.

Indexed as

CarcinomaSalivary Gland NeoplasmsFemaleHumansPrognosisRisk FactorsSalivary Glandsmachine learningmajor salivary gland tumorsprediction modelprognosisrandom survival forest

Identifiers

PMID36934429
PMCPMC10225223
OpenAlexW4327844768

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.