ArticleHeliyon2024
A novel gene-based model for prognosis prediction of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- HyPIC-3D enables characterization of migratory cancer cell subpopulations in 3D hypoxic microenvironments.Cell reports methods · 2026Article
- Single-Cell Transcriptomics Identifies Novel Prognostic Signatures in HNSCC Immunotherapy Response.Cancer science · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is a significant global health challenge. The identification of reliable prognostic biomarkers and construction of an accurate prognostic model are crucial. Methods: In this study, mRNA expression data and clinical data of HNSCC patients from The Cancer Genome Atlas were used. Overlapping candidate genes (OCGs) were identified by intersecting differentially expressed genes and prognosis-related genes. Best prognostic genes were selected using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator Cox regression based on OCGs, and a risk score was developed using the Cox coefficient of each gene. The prognostic power of the risk score was assessed using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and time-dependent receiver operating characteristic analysis. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression were performed to identify independent prognostic parameters, which were used to construct a nomogram. The predictive accuracy of the nomogram was evaluated using calibration plots. Functional enrichment analysis of risk score related genes was performed to explore the potential biological functions and pathways. External validation was conducted using data from the Gene Expression Omnibus and ArrayExpress databases. Results: FADS3, TNFRSF12A, TJP3, and FUT6 were screened to be significantly related to prognosis in HNSCC patients. The risk score effectively stratified patients into high-risk group with poor overall survival (OS) and low-risk group with better OS. Risk score, age, clinical M stage and clinical N stage were regarded as independent prognostic parameters by Cox regression analysis and used to construct a nomogram. The nomogram performed well in 1-, 2-, 3-, 5- and 10-year survival predictions. Functional enrichment analysis suggested that tight junction was closely related to the cancer. In addition, the prognostic power of the risk score was validated by external datasets. Conclusions: This study constructed a gene-based model integrating clinical prognostic parameters to accurately predict prognosis in HNSCC patients.
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.