ArticleAmerican journal of cancer research2025
Development and validation of a risk prediction model for lymph node metastasis in stage IA2-IIA1 cervical cancer based on laboratory parameters.
Article in American journal of cancer research, 2025. 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.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo develop and validate a risk prediction model for lymph node metastasis (LNM) in stage IA2-IIA1 cervical cancer (CC) using laboratory parameters to aid in preoperative risk assessment and personalized treatment planning.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 624 patients treated between 2017 and 2023, divided into a training group (418 patients) and a validation group (206 patients). Clinical and laboratory data, including squamous cell carcinoma antigen (SCC-Ag), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), cancer antigen 125 (CA125), platelet count (PLT), fibrinogen (FIB), and C-reactive protein (CRP), were collected. Independent risk factors for LNM were identified using Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression. A predictive model was constructed and evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, decision curve analysis (DCA), and calibration curve.
resultsSCC-Ag, CEA, CA125, PLT, FIB, and CRP were identified as significant predictors of LNM, with SCC-Ag demonstrating an AUC of 0.811 (sensitivity: 65.00%, specificity: 93.08%). The model achieved an AUC of 0.969 in the training group and 0.942 in the validation group, indicating robust generalizability and high predictive accuracy. DCA confirmed the model's clinical utility across a wide range of risk thresholds, and the calibration curve showed a good agreement between predicted and observed outcomes.
conclusionsThis laboratory parameter-based risk prediction model is a reliable and practical tool for assessing LNM risk in stage IA2-IIA1 CC patients, supporting better clinical decision-making and reducing unnecessary interventions.
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.