ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
Development and validation of a clinical prognostic model for BRAF V600E-mutated colorectal cancer patients based on pathological stage, microsatellite status, and primary tumor site.
Article 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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- TMTP1-Modified Small Extracellular Vesicles Target BRAF Mutation in Anaplastic Thyroid Cancer Reversing Vemurafenib Resistance With CRISPR/Cas9 Delivery.Journal of extracellular vesicles · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To develop and validate a prognostic model for patients with BRAF V600E-mutated colorectal cancer. Methods: The clinical and pathological information of 206 patients with BRAF V600E-mutated colorectal cancer diagnosed in Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, and Peking Union Medical College from 2014 to 2021 was retrospectively collected. Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression, Cox regression, and nomograms were used to develop clinical prognostic models. The differentiation was measured using C-statistic, and the predicted variability was evaluated using the calibration curve. The prognostic model was externally validated using validation set data from 164 patients pooled from five studies. Results: Our clinical prognostic model included three variables: pathological stage, microsatellite status, and primary tumor site. In internal validation, the model had a concordant index of 0.785 (95% CI [0.732-0.839]) and a concordant index of 0.754 (95% CI [0.698-0.810]) using pathological staging. External validation confirmed the robustness of the model with a consistency index of 0.670 (95% CI [0.617-0.724]) and a consistency index of 0.584 (95% CI [0.546-0.622]) using pathological staging. Likelihood ratio test results show that our model is better (internal validation, p = 5.141e-03; external validation, p = 2.728e-05). The calibration graph drawn based on the prediction and the actual situation is close to the 45° diagonal. Conclusion: By adding microsatellite status and primary tumor site on the basis of pathological stage, we improved the discriminability and prediction accuracy of the model and successfully established a prognosis model for patients with BRAF V600E mutation of colorectal cancer.
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.