Trial reportJournal of endocrinological investigation2024
Novel alternative tools for metastatic pheochromocytomas/paragangliomas prediction.
Trial report in Journal of endocrinological investigation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multi-omics insights into metastatic pheochromocytomas and paragangliomas: Mechanisms, signatures, and prediction models.Hormones (Athens, Greece) · 2026Review
- Analysis of the clinical characteristics of bone metastases after pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma surgery.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- Case Series:Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe existing prediction models for metastasis in pheochromocytomas/paragangliomas (PPGLs) showed high heterogeneity in different centers. Therefore, this study aimed to establish new prediction models integrating multiple variables based on different algorithms. DESIGN AND
methodsData of patients with PPGLs undergoing surgical resection at the Peking Union Medical College Hospital from 2007 to 2022 were collected retrospectively. Patients were randomly divided into the training and testing sets in a ratio of 7:3. Subsequently, decision trees, random forest, and logistic models were constructed for metastasis prediction with the training set and Cox models for metastasis-free survival (MFS) prediction with the total population. Additionally, Ki-67 index and tumor size were transformed into categorical variables for adjusting models. The testing set was used to assess the discrimination and calibration of models and the optimal models were visualized as nomograms. Clinical characteristics and MFS were compared between patients with and without risk factors.
resultsA total of 198 patients with 59 cases of metastasis were included and classified into the training set (n = 138) and testing set (n = 60). Among all models, the logistic regression model showed the best discrimination for metastasis prediction with an AUC of 0.891 (95% CI, 0.793-0.990), integrating SDHB germline mutations [OR: 96.72 (95% CI, 16.61-940.79)], S-100 (-) [OR: 11.22 (95% CI, 3.04-58.51)], ATRX (-) [OR: 8.42 (95% CI, 2.73-29.24)] and Ki-67 ≥ 3% [OR: 7.98 (95% CI, 2.27-32.24)] evaluated through immunohistochemistry (IHC), and tumor size ≥ 5 cm [OR: 4.59 (95% CI, 1.34-19.13)]. The multivariate Cox model including the above risk factors also showed a high C-index of 0.860 (95% CI, 0.810-0.911) in predicting MFS after surgery. Furthermore, patients with the above risk factors showed a significantly poorer MFS (P ≤ 0.001).
conclusionsModels established in this study provided alternative and reliable tools for clinicians to predict PPGLs patients' metastasis and MFS. More importantly, this study revealed for the first time that IHC of ATRX could act as an independent predictor of metastasis in PPGLs.
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.