ArticleHeliyon2024
The predictive value of serum tumor markers for EGFR mutation in non-small cell lung cancer patients with non-stage IA.
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.
- Integrating ctDNA testing forAdvances in laboratory medicine · 2025Review
- 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The predictive value of serum tumor markers (STMs) in assessing epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations among patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), particularly those with non-stage IA, remains poorly understood. The objective of this study is to construct a predictive model comprising STMs and additional clinical characteristics, aiming to achieve precise prediction of EGFR mutations through noninvasive means. Materials and methods: We retrospectively collected 6711 NSCLC patients who underwent EGFR gene testing. Ultimately, 3221 stage IA patients and 1442 non-stage IA patients were analyzed to evaluate the potential predictive value of several clinical characteristics and STMs for EGFR mutations. Results: EGFR mutations were detected in 3866 patients (57.9 %) of all NSCLC patients. None of the STMs emerged as significant predictor for predicting EGFR mutations in stage IA patients. Patients with non-stage IA were divided into the study group (n = 1043) and validation group (n = 399). In the study group, univariate analysis revealed significant associations between EGFR mutations and the STMs (carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), squamous cell carcinoma antigen (SCC), and cytokeratin-19 fragment (CYFRA21-1)). The nomogram incorporating CEA, CYFRA 21-1, pathology, gender, and smoking history for predicting EGFR mutations with non-stage IA was constructed using the results of multivariate analysis. The area under the curve (AUC = 0.780) and decision curve analysis demonstrated favorable predictive performance and clinical utility of nomogram. Additionally, the Random Forest model also demonstrated the highest average C-index of 0.793 among the eight machine learning algorithms, showcasing superior predictive efficiency. Conclusion: CYFRA21-1 and CEA have been identified as crucial factors for predicting EGFR mutations in non-stage IA NSCLC patients. The nomogram and 8 machine learning models that combined STMs with other clinical factors could effectively predict the probability of EGFR mutations.
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.