ReviewFrontiers in oncology2024
Construction of a nomogram model for predicting the outcome of debulking surgery for ovarian cancer on the basis of clinical indicators.
Review in Frontiers in oncology, 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.
- Preoperative serum HE4 combined with CA125 testing for predicting the risk of suboptimal cytoreduction in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Analysis of Risk Factors for Urinary Tract Infection in Ovarian Cancer Patients After Cytoreductive Surgery and Construction of a Nomogram Model.International journal of women's health · 2025Article
- Clinical Value of Nomogram Model based on Multimodality Ultrasound Image Characteristics Differentiating Benign and Malignant Breast Masses.Current medical imaging · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to investigate the risk factors affecting satisfaction with debulking surgery for ovarian cancer and establish a preoperative clinical predictive model. Methods: Clinical data from 131 patients who underwent ovarian cancer debulking surgery at Jiangnan University Affiliated Hospital between 2016 and 2022 were collected. Patients were randomly separated into an experimental group and a control group in a 7:3 ratio. On the basis of intraoperative outcomes, patients were grouped as either surgery-satisfactory or surgery-unsatisfactory. Clinical indicators were compared through single-factor analysis between groups. Significantly different factors ( Results: Single-factor analysis revealed the significance of factors such as albumin levels, alkaline phosphatase (ALP), ECOG scores, CA125, HE4, and lymph node metastasis. Multivariate regression analysis identified albumin levels, ALP, ECOG scores, HE4, and lymph node metastasis as independent risk factors for satisfactory surgical outcomes in patients with ovarian cancer undergoing debulking surgery as ( Conclusion: Independent risk factors associated with satisfactory tumor reduction in patients with ovarian cancer undergoing debulking surgery included decreased albumin levels, ALP > 137 U/L, ECOG = 1 score, HE4 > 140 pmol/L, and lymph node metastasis. Constructing a clinical predictive model through logistic regression analysis enables individualized testing and maximizes clinical benefits.
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.