ArticleHeliyon2025
Construction and evaluation of the prediction model for advanced disease in well-differentiated colorectal neuroendocrine neoplasms less than 2 cm in diameter.
Article in Heliyon, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Advanced lesions are often ignored in well-differentiated colorectal neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) smaller than 2 cm, and we aimed to develop an effective nomogram for these lesions. Methods: We extracted data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database and used a logistic regression model to identify independent risk factors for advanced disease. All these identified factors were included to construct the prediction model, and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, calibration plot and DCA curve were utilized to assess the predictive value. The data obtained from the National Cancer Center were utilized for external validation. Results: In total, 3223 patients were enrolled in the training set, including 2947 (91.4 %) with early disease and 276 (8.6 %) with advanced disease. The logistic analysis showed that age (odds ratio (OR) = 1.486, 95 % confidence interval (CI): 1.102-2.003, P = 0.009), tumor size (OR = 11.071, 95 % CI: 8.229-14.893, P < 0.001), tumor location (OR = 7.882, 95 % CI: 5.784-10.743, P < 0.001) and tumor grade (OR = 1.768, 95 % CI: 1.206-2.593, P = 0.004) were independent variables for advanced disease. All of them were included in the final prediction model. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.838 (95 % CI: 0.807-0.868). The calibration plot and Hosmer‒Lemeshow test (P = 0.108) indicated favorable consistency between the predicted probabilities and actual probabilities of advanced disease. The Brier score was 0.108, indicating acceptable overall performance. The DCA curve presented a significant clinical net benefit. In the validation set, both the ROC curve and calibration plot exhibited an acceptable discrimination ability (AUC = 0.807 (95 % CI 0.702-0.913) and calibration (Hosmer Lemeshow P = 0.997), respectively. Conclusions: The prediction model had good value for identifying advanced disease from well-differentiated colorectal NENs smaller than 2 cm.
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.