ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023
Prediction model for lymph node metastasis in superficial colorectal cancer: a better choice than computed tomography.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. 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, 1 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRisk evaluation of lymph node metastasis (LNM) in superficial colorectal cancer resected by endoscopic surgery is critical for determining subsequent therapeutic strategies, but the role of existing clinical methods, including computed tomography, remains limited.
methodsFeatures of the nomogram were determined by logistic regression analysis, and the performance was validated by calibration plots, ROC curves and DCA curves in both the training set and the validation set.
resultsA total of 608 consecutive superficial CRC cases were randomly divided into 426 training and 182 validation cases. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses revealed that age < 50, tumour budding, lymphatic invasion and lower HDL levels were risk factors for LNM. Stepwise regression and the Hosmer‒Lemeshow goodness of fit test showed that the nomogram had good performance and discrimination, which was validated by ROC curves and calibration plots. Internal and external validation demonstrated that the nomogram had a higher C-index (training group, 0.749, validation group, 0.693). DCA and clinical impact curves graphically show that the use of the nomogram to predict LNM had remarkable predictive power. Finally, in comparison with CT diagnosis, the nomogram also visually showed higher superiority, as demonstrated by ROC, DCA and clinical impact curves.
conclusionUsing common clinicopathologic factors, a noninvasive nomogram for individualized prediction of LNM after endoscopic surgery was conveniently established. Nomograms have great superiority in the risk stratification of LNM compared with traditional CT imaging.
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.