ArticleJCO global oncology2023
Validation of PREDICT Version 2.2 in a Retrospective Cohort of Indian Women With Operable Breast Cancer.
Article in JCO global oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Factors Affecting Pharmacokinetics of Sunitinib and Its Metabolite, SU12662: A Systematic Review of Population Pharmacokinetic Studies.European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics · 2025Pooled it
- Validation of the postoperative prognostication tool PREDICT version 2.2 and 3.0 using data from the National cancer center hospital in Japan.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2026Article
- PREDICT breast v4.0: an update to the PREDICT breast prognostic model.BMC research notes · 2025Article
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
purposeOnline prediction models that use known prognostic factors in breast cancer (BC) are routinely used to assist in decisions for adjuvant therapy. PREDICT Version 2.2 (P2.2) is one such online tool, which uses tumor size, lymph node involvement, grade, age, hormone receptor status, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status, and Ki67. We performed an external validation in a retrospective cohort of patients treated at a tertiary center in India.
methodsWomen with operable BC between 2008 and 2016 with nonmetastatic, T1-T2 invasive, and HER2 receptor-negative BC and with available 5-year overall survival (OS) data were selected. Median predicted 5-year OS rates were used to calculate predicted events for the whole cohort and subgroups. The chi-square test was used to evaluate the goodness of fit of the tool.
resultsOf 11,760 cases registered between 2008 and 2016, 2,783 (23.66%) eligible patients with a median age of 50 (26-70) years and a median pT size of 2.5 (0.1-5) cm, 2,037 (73.19%) with grade 3 tumors, 1,172 (42.11%) with node-positive disease, 817 (29.35%) with triple-negative breast cancer, and 1,966 (70.64%) with HR-positive BC were included in the analysis. The observed 5-year OS and predicted 5-year OS in the whole cohort were 94.8% and 90.00%, respectively, with an absolute difference of 4.8% (95% CI, 3.417 to 6.198,
conclusionPREDICT version 2.2 overestimated the number of deaths, with lower predicted 5-year OS compared with the observed value, in this retrospective Indian cohort. The reasons for this discrepancy could be differing biologic characteristics and possible selection bias in our cohort. We recommend a prospective validation of PREDICT in Indian patients and advocate caution in its use until such validation is achieved.
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.