ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2025
Validation of the Performance of the Novel Prognostic Staging System for Overall Survival in De Novo Metastatic Breast Cancer and Demonstration of Performance for Cancer-Specific Outcomes.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 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.
- Validation of a novel prognostic staging system for breast cancer incorporating age at diagnosis.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2026Article
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
introductionA prognostic staging system for de novo metastatic breast cancer was developed by Plichta et al. We aimed to validate this system within a more contemporary cohort; assess model performance with respect to disease-specific survival (DSS), progression-free survival (PFS), and distant PFS (DPFS); and evaluate the impact of additional data on all possible metastatic sites.
methodsA retrospective review was conducted of patients with stage IV breast cancer in our institutional cancer registry from 2010 to 2022. Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank tests were used; model discrimination was estimated using the C-statistic. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression was used to compute adjusted hazard ratios (HRs). The analysis was repeated with modified definitions incorporating all possible metastatic sites.
resultsOverall, 425 patients were included. The staging system showed fair discrimination at 3 years for overall survival (OS; C-statistic 0.64), DSS (0.65), PFS (0.60), and DPFS (0.60). With a median follow-up of 41 months, stage IVA-D OS was 84%, 79%, 59%, and 47% at 3 years, respectively. Use of modified definitions upstaged 13.1% of patients but did not change the model fit (C-statistic 0.64). Patients reclassified from A/B to C/D had worse OS than patients remaining A/B (adjusted HR 1.59) and better survival than patients who were C/D under both definitions (HR 0.61).
conclusionsThe novel prognostic staging system provided meaningful discrimination in OS as well as for DSS, PFS, and DPFS. Inclusion of all metastatic sites may improve model calibration. OS has improved in more recent years.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40730730What 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.