ArticleBMC cancer2024
Survival time prediction in patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer based on
Article in BMC cancer, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- mpMRI-based habitat analysis for predicting prognoses in patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer: a multicenter study.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Article
- CCL26 as a prognostic biomarker in hepatocellular carcinoma: integrating bioinformatics analysis, clinical validation, and radiomics score.Discover oncology · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe presence of heterogeneity is a significant attribute within the context of ovarian cancer. This study aimed to assess the predictive accuracy of models utilizing quantitative
methodsA total of 292 patients diagnosed with HGSOC were retrospectively enrolled at Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University (median age: 54 ± 9.4 years). Quantitative inter-tumor heterogeneity metrics were calculated based on conventional measurements and texture features of primary and metastatic lesions in
resultsThe C-indices of the integrated models were the highest for both PFS and OS models. The C-indices of the training set and testing set of the integrated PFS model were 0.898 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.881-0.914) and 0.891 (95% CI: 0.860-0.921), respectively. For the integrated OS model, the C-indices of the training set and testing set were 0.894 (95% CI: 0.871-0.917) and 0.905 (95% CI: 0.873-0.936), respectively. The integrated PFS model showed the strongest correlation with the expression levels of p53 (ρ = 0.859, p < 0.001) and Ki-67 (ρ = 0.829, p < 0.001).
conclusionsThe models based on
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.