ArticleTranslational cancer research2026
Prediction of distant metastasis and survival of appendiceal cancer patients: a SEER population-based study.
Article in Translational cancer research, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Appendiceal cancer (AC) is a rare and heterogeneous malignancy that is often diagnosed incidentally and shows marked variation in metastatic risk and prognosis. Current staging systems provide limited individualized prediction, so we developed and validated nomogram models to estimate distant metastasis (DM) and survival outcomes. Methods: Data of 6,916 pathologically confirmed AC patients diagnosed between 2004 and 2021 were extracted from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database and randomly divided into training (n=4,844) and validation (n=2,072) cohorts at a 7:3 ratio. Independent risk factors for DM were identified by logistic regression, while prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were determined by Cox regression analyses. Based on these variables, nomograms were constructed and their performance was assessed using concordance index (C-index), area under the curve (AUC), calibration curves, and decision curve analysis (DCA). Results: The DM nomogram showed excellent discrimination with AUCs of 0.916 and 0.905 in the training and validation cohorts, respectively. For OS and CSS, age ≥51 years, poor differentiation, advanced tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stage, histological subtype, chemotherapy, marital status, and surgery were significant predictors. The OS and CSS nomograms demonstrated high accuracy, with C-indexes above 0.85 and robust AUCs for 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival predictions in both cohorts. Calibration curves and DCA confirmed good agreement between predicted and observed outcomes as well as clinical utility. Risk stratification based on the DM nomogram effectively distinguished patients with significantly different OS and CSS. Conclusions: These nomograms provide reliable tools for individual prediction and clinical decision-making in AC patients.
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.