ArticleCancers2026
External Validation of the ARCAD Nomogram in a Real-World Cohort with Stage 4 Colorectal Cancer.
Article in Cancers, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe ARCAD-CRC nomogram predicts 1-year survival in clinical trial populations with stage 4 colorectal cancer (CRC). This study evaluated its performance in a real-world cohort.
methodsPatients with stage 4 CRC were identified from the Flatiron database. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model for overall survival was applied to fit the reduced model derived from the published full ARCAD nomogram, as some variables were unavailable in the database. Validation of the reduced model used C-index, while predictive performance was assessed using time-dependent ROC analysis and calibration in the Flatiron real-world cohort (FRWC).
resultsA total 9710 patients, including 5740 deceased, were analyzed. The FRWC was older (64 vs. 62 years) and had poorer ECOG-PS (15% vs. 4% with ECOG 2+) compared to the ARCAD cohort. The reduced nomogram's calibration was comparable to the full model (C-index 0.67 vs. 0.68). In the FRWC, the reduced nomogram showed good discrimination, with time-dependent AUROC at the 12-month time horizon of 0.741 (95% CI 0.729-0.753). Calibration plots indicated the reduced ARCAD-CRC nomogram performed quantitively well with a calibration slope of 1.010 (95% CI 0.966-1.054). The calibration intercept was -0.160 (95% CI -0.189, -0.131), indicating systematic underestimation of 1-year survival in the FRWC. The predicted and observed 1-year OS using the reduced ARCAD nomogram in the FRWC were 0.640 (95% CI 0.637, 0.644) and 0.694 (95% CI 0.684-0.703), respectively.
conclusionsOur findings show that the ARCAD-CRC nomogram is a useful tool for predicting 1-year survival in a real-world cohort. The observed underestimation of survival may be due to advances in CRC treatments, as the FRWC cohort (2013-2020) was collected later than the original ARCAD cohort (1997-2012).
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.