ArticleHeliyon2024
Development and validation of a prognostic nomogram for patients with ganglioneuroblastoma: A SEER-based study.
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.
- A clinically annotated transcriptomic atlas of nervous system tumors.Neuro-oncology · 2025Article
- Stereotactic radiosurgery for brain metastases secondary to adrenal ganglioneuroblastoma: illustrative case.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The objective of this study was to construct a prognostic nomogram for ganglioneuroblastoma (GNB), as the prognosis of GNB is difficult to accurately predict before therapy. Methods: The data were collected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. The patients included in this study were randomly divided into a development group and a validation group at a ratio of 7:3. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were used to filter the variables. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and calibration curves were used to assess the nomogram. All patients were redivided into two groups based on their nomogram total points, and overall survival was compared. Results: A total of 1194 GNB patients were retrospectively included, with 835 and 359 patients in the development and validation groups, respectively. Five independent prognostic factors, including age, primary tumor site, SEER stage, surgery and chemotherapy, were screened out and included in the nomogram. The consistency index (C-index) of the Cox regression model was 0.862 and 0.827 in the development group and the validation group, respectively. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) showed that the nomogram had good accuracy in predicting 3-, 5- and 10-year overall survival for GNB patients. The calibration curves of the nomogram showed good agreement between the predicted outcomes and the actual observations. The Kaplan-Meier (KM) survival curves revealed that patients with nomogram scores below the median had a better prognosis. Conclusions: Age, primary tumor site, SEER stage, surgery and chemotherapy may be independent prognostic factors for GNB. We constructed a nomogram based on the SEER database to predict the prognosis of GNB, but further optimization by adding more risk factors is needed for clinical application.
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.