ArticleScientific reports2025
Correlation between serum endocrine hormone levels and malignancy degree of prolactinoma and their predictive value for patient prognosis.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To investigate the correlation between serum endocrine hormone levels and the malignancy degree of prolactinomas, and analyze their predictive value for patient prognosis. A total of 100 prolactinoma patients admitted to the Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University from January 2019 to December 2024 were enrolled. Based on tumor invasiveness, patients were divided into benign (n = 74) and malignant (n = 26) groups. Serum endocrine hormone levels were compared between groups. Pearson's test analyzed correlations between hormone levels and tumor malignancy. According to new metastases, recurrence, or death during follow-up, patients were classified into good prognosis (n = 69) and poor prognosis (n = 31) groups. Multivariate logistic regression identified factors influencing poor prognosis. Restricted cubic spline analysis evaluated dose-response relationships between hormone levels and poor prognosis risk. A nomogram model was constructed and its predictive performance evaluated. The malignant group showed significantly higher serum prolactin (PRL) levels but lower free thyroxine (fT4) levels than the benign group (P < 0.001). Serum PRL positively correlated with tumor malignancy (r = 0.460, P < 0.001), while fT4 showed negative correlation (r= - 0.453, P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed giant tumor type and elevated PRL as risk factors for poor prognosis, whereas pseudocapsule presence and increased fT4 were protective factors (P < 0.05). Nonlinear relationships existed between poor prognosis risk and PRL/fT4 levels (Pnonlinear < 0.05). In the nomogram model, all four factors had variance inflation factors (VIF) < 5 (1.043-1.091). The model's ROC curve area was 0.888, and Hosmer-Lemeshow test confirmed good accuracy (χ
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.