ArticleHeliyon2023
A hierarchical prognostic model for Co-diabetes pancreatic adenocarcinoma.
Article in Heliyon, 2023. 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.
- Nuclear magnetic resonance-based metabolomics and risk of pancreatic cancer: a prospective analysis in the UK Biobank.Journal of gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Co-diabetes pancreatic adenocarcinoma has a poorer prognosis than pancreatic adenocarcinoma without diabetes. This study aimed to develop a reliable prognostic model for patients with co-diabetes pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Method: Overall, 169 patients with co-diabetes pancreatic adenocarcinoma were included in our study. First, the independent risk factors affecting the prognosis of patients with co-diabetes pancreatic adenocarcinoma were determined by univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses. Based on these identified risk factors, we developed a nomogram and evaluated its predictive ability using the concordance index, receiver operating characteristic curve, calibration plot, decision curve, and net reclassification index. Results: In this study, prealbumin, transferrin, carcinoembryonic antigen, distant metastasis, tumor differentiation neutrophil count, lymphocyte count and fasting blood glucose were confirmed as significant prognostic factors. Based on these predictors, a new nomogram was developed. Compared with the American Joint Committee on Cancer 8 staging system and other models, the nomogram achieved a higher concordance index in the training (0.795) and validation (0.729) queues. The area under the nomogram's curve for predicting patient survival at 0.5, 1, and 1.5 years in the training queue was >0.8. Patients were risk-stratified using the nomogram, and Kaplan-Meier survival curves of subgroups were plotted. The Kaplan-Meier curve also showed better separation than the American Joint Committee on Cancer 8 staging system, indicating that our model has a better risk hierarchical ability. Conclusions: Compared to the American Joint Committee on Cancer 8 staging system and other predictive models, our model showed better predictive ability for patients with co-diabetes pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Our model will help in patients' risk stratification and improves their prognosis.
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.