Clinical features and prognostic factors of combined small cell lung cancer: development and validation of a nomogram based on the SEER database.
Combined small cell lung cancer (CSCLC)
nomogram
prognosis
propensity-score matching (PSM)
the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)
Journal
Translational lung cancer research
ISSN: 2218-6751
Titre abrégé: Transl Lung Cancer Res
Pays: China
ID NLM: 101646875
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2021
Nov 2021
Historique:
received:
26
08
2021
accepted:
03
11
2021
entrez:
10
1
2022
pubmed:
11
1
2022
medline:
11
1
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Combined small-cell lung cancer (CSCLC) refers to the simultaneous presence of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) and any subtype of the non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study aimed to explore the prognosis of CSCLC, NSCLC, and pure SCLC patients, and to develop a nomogram to estimate the overall survival (OS) for CSCLC patients. Patients diagnosed with NSCLC, CSCLC, and pure SCLC between 2004 and 2015 were identified from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. Survival analyses were performed by using the Kaplan Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards regression. All CSCLC patients were randomly split 7:3 into training and validation sets. A nomogram was developed by integrating all independent predictors for OS. The performance of the nomogram was determined by discrimination, calibration ability, clinical usefulness, and risk stratification ability. A total of 326,695 lung cancer patients, including 871 with CSCLC, 280,391 with NSCLC, and 45,433 with pure SCLC were enrolled. CSCLC was associated with worse survival compared with NSCLC both in the unmatched and matched cohorts. However, compared to pure SCLC, CSCLC was associated with significantly better survival in the unmatched cohorts only, while showed marginally non-significantly better survival after propensity score matching (PSM). For CSCLC, a nomogram was constructed for the 6-month, 1-year, and 3-year OS prediction by combining the independent risk factors, including age, gender, tumor, node, and metastasis stage, surgery, and chemotherapy. The nomogram showed good discrimination and calibration both in the training and validation sets, and better performance than the tumor-node-metastasis staging system. Risk stratification analysis indicated that the nomogram scores efficiently divided CSCLC patients into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups (P CSCLC patients presented a significantly worse prognosis than patients with NSCLC, but comparable prognosis when compared with pure SCLC patients in the matched cohorts. In addition, we developed and validated a nomogram for predicting the 6-month, 1-year, and 3-year OS in CSCLC patients.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Combined small-cell lung cancer (CSCLC) refers to the simultaneous presence of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) and any subtype of the non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study aimed to explore the prognosis of CSCLC, NSCLC, and pure SCLC patients, and to develop a nomogram to estimate the overall survival (OS) for CSCLC patients.
METHODS
METHODS
Patients diagnosed with NSCLC, CSCLC, and pure SCLC between 2004 and 2015 were identified from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. Survival analyses were performed by using the Kaplan Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards regression. All CSCLC patients were randomly split 7:3 into training and validation sets. A nomogram was developed by integrating all independent predictors for OS. The performance of the nomogram was determined by discrimination, calibration ability, clinical usefulness, and risk stratification ability.
RESULTS
RESULTS
A total of 326,695 lung cancer patients, including 871 with CSCLC, 280,391 with NSCLC, and 45,433 with pure SCLC were enrolled. CSCLC was associated with worse survival compared with NSCLC both in the unmatched and matched cohorts. However, compared to pure SCLC, CSCLC was associated with significantly better survival in the unmatched cohorts only, while showed marginally non-significantly better survival after propensity score matching (PSM). For CSCLC, a nomogram was constructed for the 6-month, 1-year, and 3-year OS prediction by combining the independent risk factors, including age, gender, tumor, node, and metastasis stage, surgery, and chemotherapy. The nomogram showed good discrimination and calibration both in the training and validation sets, and better performance than the tumor-node-metastasis staging system. Risk stratification analysis indicated that the nomogram scores efficiently divided CSCLC patients into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups (P
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
CSCLC patients presented a significantly worse prognosis than patients with NSCLC, but comparable prognosis when compared with pure SCLC patients in the matched cohorts. In addition, we developed and validated a nomogram for predicting the 6-month, 1-year, and 3-year OS in CSCLC patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35004254
doi: 10.21037/tlcr-21-804
pii: tlcr-10-11-4250
pmc: PMC8674603
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
4250-4265Informations de copyright
2021 Translational Lung Cancer Research. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tlcr-21-804). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Références
Lancet Oncol. 2015 Apr;16(4):e173-80
pubmed: 25846097
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2021 Mar 02;19(3):254-266
pubmed: 33668021
Clin Lung Cancer. 2020 Mar;21(2):186-193.e2
pubmed: 31606340
Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2017 Sep 16;491(2):493-499
pubmed: 28684311
Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2021 Feb;10(2):636-650
pubmed: 33718010
Cancer. 2021 Mar 1;127(5):709-719
pubmed: 33119177
Onco Targets Ther. 2018 Jun 19;11:3505-3511
pubmed: 29950855
Front Oncol. 2020 Apr 24;10:626
pubmed: 32391280
Thorac Cancer. 2020 Aug;11(8):2087-2093
pubmed: 32589361
J Thorac Dis. 2020 Oct;12(10):6298-6307
pubmed: 33209468
J Thorac Oncol. 2018 Feb;13(2):237-245
pubmed: 29101056
J Thorac Oncol. 2015 Sep;10(9):1243-1260
pubmed: 26291008
Ann Surg. 2018 Dec;268(6):1105-1112
pubmed: 28475559
J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2018 Oct;16(10):1171-1182
pubmed: 30323087
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Apr 21;4:CD011917
pubmed: 28429473
Ann Oncol. 2021 Jul;32(7):839-853
pubmed: 33864941
Int J Cancer. 2018 Nov 1;143(9):2133-2144
pubmed: 29696628
Med Decis Making. 2006 Nov-Dec;26(6):565-74
pubmed: 17099194
Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2020 Dec;9(6):2428-2439
pubmed: 33489804
Cancer. 1981 Apr 1;47(7):1863-6
pubmed: 6261929
Clin Lung Cancer. 2013 Mar;14(2):113-9
pubmed: 23010092
Chin J Cancer Res. 2016 Oct;28(5):486-494
pubmed: 27877007
Lancet. 2021 Aug 7;398(10299):535-554
pubmed: 34273294
Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2021 Jan 14;7(1):3
pubmed: 33446664
J Thorac Oncol. 2020 Dec;15(12):1823-1835
pubmed: 33011388
Clin Respir J. 2018 Mar;12(3):1093-1099
pubmed: 28371208
Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2020 Oct;9(5):1785-1794
pubmed: 33209601