ArticleCancer medicine2026
Nomogram Prediction Model and Prognostic Comparison of Cervical Clear Cell Carcinoma and Cervical Endometrioid Adenocarcinoma: A SEER Database Study.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2026. 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCervical clear cell adenocarcinoma (CCAC) and cervical endometrioid adenocarcinoma (CEAC) are rare and aggressive non-HPV-associated malignancies. Despite their histological similarities, these subtypes demonstrate distinct biological behaviors, presenting challenges in treatment and prognosis.
objectiveTo develop and validate a multivariable prognostic model for CCAC and CEAC, utilizing the SEER database to enhance clinical decision-making.
methodsA total of 775 CEAC and 421 CCAC cases were analyzed using a multivariable nomogram. Patients were randomly allocated to model-development (n = 838) and validation (n = 358) cohorts in a 7:3 ratio. The model's performance was evaluated through AUC, Brier score, and Calibration. Decision Curve Analysis (DCA) and Clinical Impact Curve (CIC) were assessed in both development and internal validation cohorts.
resultsThe model exhibited excellent calibration and discrimination in predicting overall survival (OS). In the development cohort, the 12- and 24-month prediction models had AUCs of 0.894 (95% CI: 0.860-0.928) and 0.857 (95% CI: 0.821-0.892), respectively. In the internal validation cohort, the 12- and 24-month models achieved AUCs of 0.814 (95% CI: 0.788-0.840) and 0.798 (95% CI: 0.775-0.822), respectively. The model effectively stratified patients into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, with significantly different median survival times (p < 0.0001). DCA and CIC further validated the model's clinical utility.
conclusionWe developed a robust nomogram for quantifying OS risk in CCAC and CEAC patients. This model provides clinicians with a tool for identifying high-risk patients and implementing timely 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.