ArticleFrontiers in oncology2023
Optimal treatment strategy and prognostic analysis for patients with non-metastatic pT4 colon adenocarcinoma.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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, 0 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
Objective: This study endeavored to explore the optimal treatment strategy and conduct a prognostic analysis for patients diagnosed with pT4M0 (pathologic stage T4) colon adenocarcinoma (COAD). Methods and materials: A total of 8,843 patients diagnosed with pT4M0 COAD between January 2010 and December 2015 were included in this study from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. These patients were randomly divided into a training set and an internal validation set using a 7:3 ratio. Variables that demonstrated statistical significance (P<0.05) in univariate COX regression analysis or held clinical significance were incorporated into the multivariate COX regression model. Subsequently, this model was utilized to formulate a nomogram. The predictive accuracy and discriminability of the nomogram were assessed using the C-index, area under the curve (AUC), and calibration curves. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was conducted to confirm the clinical validity of the model. Results: In the entire SEER cohort, the 3-year overall survival (OS) rate (74.22% vs. 63.20%, P<0.001) and the 3-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) rate (76.25% vs. 66.98%, P<0.001) in the surgery combined with postoperative adjuvant therapy (S+ADT) group surpassed those in the surgery (S) group. Multivariate COX regression analysis of the training set unveiled correlations between age, race, N stage, serum CEA (carcinoembryonic antigen), differentiation, number of resected lymph nodes, and treatment modalities with OS and CSS. Nomograms for OS and CSS were meticulously crafted based on these variables, achieving C-indexes of 0.692 and 0.690 in the training set, respectively. The robust predictive ability of the nomogram was further affirmed through receiver operating characteristic (ROC) and calibration curves in both the training and validation sets. Conclusion: In individuals diagnosed with pT4M0 COAD, the integration of surgery with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy demonstrated a substantial extension of long-term survival. The nomogram, which incorporated key factors such as age, race, differentiation, N stage, serum CEA level, tumor size, and the number of resected lymph nodes, stood as a dependable tool for predicting OS and CSS rates. This predictive model held promise in aiding clinicians by identifying high-risk patients and facilitating the development of personalized treatment plans.
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.