ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Common laboratory parameters as predictors of prognosis in primary lung cancer.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The prognosis of patients with primary lung cancer remains poor. Therefore, this study aimed to develop and validate a predictive model to evaluate the overall survival (OS) of these patients. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on the data of 1,308 patients with primary lung cancer who received treatment and follow-up at our hospital from 2016 to 2022. The entire cohort was randomly divided into a derivation cohort (70%, n=915) and a validation cohort (30%, n=393) in a 7:3 ratio. A prognostic nomogram was constructed using Cox-least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression analysis to predict the OS probabilities at 1-, 3-, and 5-years. Kaplan-Meier curve and log-rank tests were used to analyze and compare OS among different patient subgroups. The model was comprehensively evaluated through the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA). Results: Age, gender, red blood cell count, serum potassium, albumin-globulin ratio, and prothrombin time activity were the prognostic indicators for predicting OS in patients with primary lung cancer. In the derivation cohort, the AUCs at 1-, 3-, and 5-years were 0.739 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.702-0.776), 0.727 (95% CI: 0.690-0.764), and 0.675 (95% CI: 0.629-0.721). In the validation cohort, the AUCs at 1-, 3-, and 5-years were 0.770 (95% CI: 0.712-0.827), 0.784 (95% CI: 0.732-0.837), and 0.717 (95% CI: 0.646-0.789), respectively. The calibration curve and DCA results confirmed the model's good predictive power. Conclusion: In this study, we developed and validated an OS prediction model for patients with primary lung cancer. Providing personalized predictions with multiple outcomes increases the information available to patients and clinicians.
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.