Calculating the overall survival probability in patients with cervical cancer: a nomogram and decision curve analysis-based study.
Cervical cancer
Decision curve analysis
Nomogram
Overall survival
Journal
BMC cancer
ISSN: 1471-2407
Titre abrégé: BMC Cancer
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967800
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Sep 2020
01 Sep 2020
Historique:
received:
13
05
2020
accepted:
26
08
2020
entrez:
3
9
2020
pubmed:
3
9
2020
medline:
24
4
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Cervical cancer has long been a common malignance troubling women. However, there are few studies developing nomogram with comprehensive factors for the prognosis of cervical cancer. Hence, we aimed to build a nomogram to calculate the overall survival (OS) probability in patients with cervical cancer. Data of 9876 female patients in SEER database and diagnosed as cervical cancer during 2010-2015, was retrospectively analyzed. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression model were applied to select predicted factors and a nomogram was developed to visualize the prediction model. The nomogram was compared with the FIGO stage prediction model. Harrell's C-index, receiver operating curve, calibration plot and decision curve analysis were used to assess the discrimination, accuracy, calibration and clinical utility of the prediction models. Eleven independent prognostic variables, including age at diagnosis, race, marital status at diagnosis, grade, histology, tumor size, FIGO stage, primary site surgery, regional lymph node surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy, were used to build the nomogram. The C-index of the nomogram was 0.826 (95% CI: 0.818 to 0.834), which was better than that of the FIGO stage prediction model (C-index: 0.785, 95% CI: 0.776 to 0.793). Calibration plot of the nomogram was well fitted in 3-year overall OS prediction, but overfitting in 5-year OS prediction. The net benefit of the nomogram was higher than the FIGO prediction model. A clinical useful nomogram for calculating the overall survival probability in cervical cancer patients was developed. It performed better than the FIGO stage prediction model and could help clinicians to choose optimal treatments and precisely predict prognosis in clinical care and research.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Cervical cancer has long been a common malignance troubling women. However, there are few studies developing nomogram with comprehensive factors for the prognosis of cervical cancer. Hence, we aimed to build a nomogram to calculate the overall survival (OS) probability in patients with cervical cancer.
METHODS
METHODS
Data of 9876 female patients in SEER database and diagnosed as cervical cancer during 2010-2015, was retrospectively analyzed. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression model were applied to select predicted factors and a nomogram was developed to visualize the prediction model. The nomogram was compared with the FIGO stage prediction model. Harrell's C-index, receiver operating curve, calibration plot and decision curve analysis were used to assess the discrimination, accuracy, calibration and clinical utility of the prediction models.
RESULT
RESULTS
Eleven independent prognostic variables, including age at diagnosis, race, marital status at diagnosis, grade, histology, tumor size, FIGO stage, primary site surgery, regional lymph node surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy, were used to build the nomogram. The C-index of the nomogram was 0.826 (95% CI: 0.818 to 0.834), which was better than that of the FIGO stage prediction model (C-index: 0.785, 95% CI: 0.776 to 0.793). Calibration plot of the nomogram was well fitted in 3-year overall OS prediction, but overfitting in 5-year OS prediction. The net benefit of the nomogram was higher than the FIGO prediction model.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
A clinical useful nomogram for calculating the overall survival probability in cervical cancer patients was developed. It performed better than the FIGO stage prediction model and could help clinicians to choose optimal treatments and precisely predict prognosis in clinical care and research.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32873257
doi: 10.1186/s12885-020-07349-4
pii: 10.1186/s12885-020-07349-4
pmc: PMC7466454
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
833Subventions
Organisme : Key Research and Development Program of Shaanxi
ID : 2019SF-100
Organisme : The Bureau of Xi'an Science and Technology
ID : 201805098YX6SF32(1)
Organisme : The Clinical Research Project of the First Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University
ID : XJTU1AF-CRF-2019-023
Références
Lancet Oncol. 2015 Apr;16(4):e173-80
pubmed: 25846097
Cancer Manag Res. 2019 Mar 06;11:2051-2058
pubmed: 30881129
Psychooncology. 2017 May;26(5):704-710
pubmed: 26810012
J Obstet Gynaecol. 2017 Apr;37(3):347-354
pubmed: 28141947
J Clin Oncol. 2017 Feb;35(4):472-473
pubmed: 28129527
Gynecol Oncol. 2016 Dec;143(3):539-544
pubmed: 27769525
Front Oncol. 2019 Nov 05;9:1106
pubmed: 31750238
Gynecol Oncol. 2014 Dec;135(3):462-7
pubmed: 25312397
BMJ. 2016 Aug 30;354:i4338
pubmed: 27576867
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Jul 1;33(19):2136-42
pubmed: 25732170
BMC Cancer. 2020 Feb 4;20(1):97
pubmed: 32019501
BMC Cancer. 2017 Dec 12;17(1):840
pubmed: 29233120
J Gynecol Oncol. 2016 Jul;27(4):e43
pubmed: 27171673
Curr Med Res Opin. 2019 Apr;35(4):595-601
pubmed: 30019594
Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 Jul;98(30):e16421
pubmed: 31348242
Mol Clin Oncol. 2018 Feb;8(2):281-285
pubmed: 29435288
N Engl J Med. 2018 Nov 15;379(20):1905-1914
pubmed: 30379613
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Mar 10;33(8):861-9
pubmed: 25624438
Br J Cancer. 2012 Sep 4;107(6):918-24
pubmed: 22871885
J Clin Epidemiol. 2016 Jun;74:167-76
pubmed: 26772608
Gynecol Oncol. 2012 Oct;127(1):136-40
pubmed: 22735785
Sci Rep. 2018 May 21;8(1):7940
pubmed: 29786691
Cancer Res Treat. 2018 Jul;50(3):768-776
pubmed: 28724282
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2012 Feb;285(2):493-7
pubmed: 21735188
Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2015 May;25 Suppl 1:17
pubmed: 25955904
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2009 May;105(2):103-4
pubmed: 19367689
Sci Rep. 2019 Mar 1;9(1):3284
pubmed: 30824727
Lancet Haematol. 2018 Jul;5(7):e289-e298
pubmed: 29885940
JAMA. 2015 Jan 27;313(4):409-10
pubmed: 25626037
CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 Nov;68(6):394-424
pubmed: 30207593
BMJ. 2016 Jan 25;352:i6
pubmed: 26810254
J Transl Med. 2019 Mar 25;17(1):98
pubmed: 30909980
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2011;12(7):1753-6
pubmed: 22126559