ArticlePloS one2024
Development and validation of nomograms to predict survival of neuroendocrine carcinoma in genitourinary system: A population-based retrospective study.
Article in PloS one, 2024. 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.
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) is a rare yet potentially perilous neoplasm. The objective of this study was to develop prognostic models for the survival of NEC patients in the genitourinary system and subsequently validate these models. A total of 7125 neuroendocrine neoplasm (NEN) patients were extracted. Comparison of survival in patients with different types of NEN before and after propensity score-matching (PSM). A total of 3057 patients with NEC, whose information was complete, were extracted. The NEC influencing factors were chosen through the utilization of the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression model (LASSO) and the Fine & Gary model (FGM). Furthermore, nomograms were built. To validate the accuracy of the prediction, the efficiency was verified using bootstrap self-sampling techniques and receiver operating characteristic curves. LASSO and FGM were utilized to construct three models. Confirmation of validation was achieved by conducting analyses of the area under the curve and decision curve. Moreover, the FGS (DSS analysis using FGM) model produced higher net benefits. To maximize the advantages for patients, the FGS model disregarded the influence of additional occurrences. Patients are expected to experience advantages in terms of treatment options and survival assessment through the utilization of these models.
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.