ArticleBMC gastroenterology2024
Developing and validation a prognostic model for predicting prognosis among synchronous colorectal cancers patients using combined log odds ratio of positive lymph nodes: a SEER database study.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe aim of the study is to identify risk factors for the prognosis and survival of synchronous colorectal cancer and to create and validate a functional Nomogram for predicting cancer-specific survival in patients with synchronous colorectal cancer.
methodsSynchronous colorectal cancers cases were retrieved from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database retrospectively, then they were randomly divided into training (n = 3371) and internal validation (n = 1440) sets, and a set of 100 patients from our group was used as external validation. Risk factors for synchronous colorectal cancer were determined using univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses, and two Nomograms were established to forecast the overall survival and cancer-specific survival, respectively. We assessed the Nomogram performance in terms of discrimination and calibration. Bootstrap resampling was used as an internal verification method, and we select external data from our hospital as independent validation sets.
resultsTwo Nomograms are established to predict the overall survival and cancer-specific survival. In OS Nomogram, sex, age, marital status, ttumor pathological grade, AJCC TNM stage, preoperative serum CEA level, LODDS, radiotherapy and chemotherapy were determined as prognostic factors. In CSS Nomogram, age and marital status, AJCC TNM stage, tumor pathological grade, preoperative serum CEA level, LODDS, radiotherapy and chemotherapy were determined as prognostic factors.The C-indexes for the forecast of overall survival were 0.70, and the C-index was 0.68 for the training and internal validation cohort, respectively. The C-indexes for the forecast of cancer-specific survival were 0.75, and the C-index was 0.74 for the training and internal validation cohort, respectively. The Nomogram calibration curves showed no significant deviation from the reference line, indicating a good level of calibration. Both C-index and calibration curves indicated noticeable performance of newly established Nomograms.
conclusionsThose Nomograms with risk rating system can identify high risk patients who require more aggressive therapeutic intervention and longer and more frequent follow-up scheme, demonstrated prognostic efficiency.
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.