Nomogram Predicts Risk and Prognostic Factors for Bone Metastasis of Pancreatic Cancer: A Population-Based Analysis.
Cox regression
Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database
bone metastasis
logistic regression
nomogram
pancreatic cancer
predictors
Journal
Frontiers in endocrinology
ISSN: 1664-2392
Titre abrégé: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101555782
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
25
08
2021
accepted:
30
12
2021
entrez:
31
3
2022
pubmed:
1
4
2022
medline:
2
4
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The overall survival (OS) of pancreatic cancer (PC) patients with bone metastasis (BM) is extremely low, and it is pretty hard to treat bone metastasis. However, there are currently no effective nomograms to predict the diagnosis and prognosis of pancreatic cancer with bone metastasis (PCBM). Therefore, it is of great significance to establish effective predictive models to guide clinical practice. We screened patients from Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database between 2010 and 2016. The independent risk factors of PCBM were identified from univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses, and univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were used to determine independent prognostic factors affecting the prognosis of PCBM. In addition, two nomograms were constructed to predict the risk and prognosis of PCBM. We used the area under the curve (AUC), C-index and calibration curve to determine the predictive accuracy and discriminability of nomograms. The decision curve analysis (DCA) and Kaplan-Meier(K-M) survival curves were employed to further confirm the clinical effectiveness of the nomogram. Multivariable logistic regression analyses revealed that risk factors of PCBM included age, primary site, histological subtype, N stage, radiotherapy, surgery, brain metastasis, lung metastasis, and liver metastasis. Using Cox regression analyses, we found that independent prognostic factors of PCBM were age, race, grade, histological subtype, surgery, chemotherapy, and lung metastasis. We utilized nomograms to visually express data analysis results. The C-index of training cohort was 0.795 (95%CI: 0.758-0.832), whereas that of internal validation cohort was 0.800 (95%CI: 0.739-0.862), and the external validation cohort was 0.787 (95%CI: 0.746-0.828). Based on AUC of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, calibration plots, and decision curve analysis (DCA), we concluded that the risk and prognosis model of PCBM exhibits excellent performance. Nomogram is sufficiently accurate to predict the risk and prognostic factors of PCBM, allowing for individualized clinical decisions for future clinical work.
Sections du résumé
Background
The overall survival (OS) of pancreatic cancer (PC) patients with bone metastasis (BM) is extremely low, and it is pretty hard to treat bone metastasis. However, there are currently no effective nomograms to predict the diagnosis and prognosis of pancreatic cancer with bone metastasis (PCBM). Therefore, it is of great significance to establish effective predictive models to guide clinical practice.
Methods
We screened patients from Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database between 2010 and 2016. The independent risk factors of PCBM were identified from univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses, and univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were used to determine independent prognostic factors affecting the prognosis of PCBM. In addition, two nomograms were constructed to predict the risk and prognosis of PCBM. We used the area under the curve (AUC), C-index and calibration curve to determine the predictive accuracy and discriminability of nomograms. The decision curve analysis (DCA) and Kaplan-Meier(K-M) survival curves were employed to further confirm the clinical effectiveness of the nomogram.
Results
Multivariable logistic regression analyses revealed that risk factors of PCBM included age, primary site, histological subtype, N stage, radiotherapy, surgery, brain metastasis, lung metastasis, and liver metastasis. Using Cox regression analyses, we found that independent prognostic factors of PCBM were age, race, grade, histological subtype, surgery, chemotherapy, and lung metastasis. We utilized nomograms to visually express data analysis results. The C-index of training cohort was 0.795 (95%CI: 0.758-0.832), whereas that of internal validation cohort was 0.800 (95%CI: 0.739-0.862), and the external validation cohort was 0.787 (95%CI: 0.746-0.828). Based on AUC of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, calibration plots, and decision curve analysis (DCA), we concluded that the risk and prognosis model of PCBM exhibits excellent performance.
Conclusion
Nomogram is sufficiently accurate to predict the risk and prognostic factors of PCBM, allowing for individualized clinical decisions for future clinical work.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35356148
doi: 10.3389/fendo.2021.752176
pmc: PMC8959409
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
752176Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Zhang, Ji, Wang, Zhu, Luo, Zhang, Tong, Feng, Kang and Bi.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
Eur J Cancer. 2014 Jul;50(10):1697-1705
pubmed: 24768572
Mol Cancer. 2018 Jun 14;17(1):95
pubmed: 29903049
J Clin Oncol. 2015 Mar 10;33(8):861-9
pubmed: 25624438
Cell. 2011 Oct 14;147(2):275-92
pubmed: 22000009
Oncol Lett. 2019 Feb;17(2):2303-2307
pubmed: 30719110
Mol Med Rep. 2017 Oct;16(4):4784-4790
pubmed: 28849200
J Clin Oncol. 2008 Jan 20;26(3):380-5
pubmed: 18202413
JAMA. 2015 Jan 13;313(2):165-73
pubmed: 25585328
Acta Chir Belg. 2020 Feb;120(1):30-34
pubmed: 30614389
Lancet Oncol. 2015 Apr;16(4):e173-80
pubmed: 25846097
J Bone Oncol. 2019 Jul 09;17:100251
pubmed: 31372332
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2020 Aug;35(8):1575-1585
pubmed: 32417937
Int J Oncol. 2009 Apr;34(4):881-95
pubmed: 19287945
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 Jan;18(1):171-178.e10
pubmed: 31202981
Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 2012 Nov;39(12):2143-5
pubmed: 23268004
J Gastrointest Surg. 2019 Apr;23(4):768-778
pubmed: 30706376
Nat Rev Cancer. 2009 Sep;9(9):609
pubmed: 19705523
J Bone Miner Res. 2018 Dec;33(12):2099-2113
pubmed: 30476357
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1984 Jul;108(7):584-7
pubmed: 6547324
Eur Urol. 2016 Jun;69(6):1038-43
pubmed: 26272236
J Oncol. 2020 Dec 2;2020:8889571
pubmed: 33343665
N Engl J Med. 2011 May 12;364(19):1817-25
pubmed: 21561347
CA Cancer J Clin. 2021 May;71(3):209-249
pubmed: 33538338
Clin Cancer Res. 2018 Dec 15;24(24):6421-6432
pubmed: 30087142
Urol Oncol. 2017 Nov;35(11):664.e11-664.e18
pubmed: 28801025
Nihon Shokakibyo Gakkai Zasshi. 2004 Aug;101(8):872-8
pubmed: 15382705
J Gastrointest Surg. 2003 Dec;7(8):953-9; discussion 959-60
pubmed: 14675704
Dis Model Mech. 2011 Mar;4(2):165-78
pubmed: 21324931
Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2017 Mar;111:152-165
pubmed: 28259290
Pancreas. 2018 Aug;47(7):e43-e46
pubmed: 29985850
Cancer J. 2001 Jul-Aug;7(4):298-311
pubmed: 11561606
Transl Oncol. 2020 Feb;13(2):308-320
pubmed: 31877463
J Clin Oncol. 2008 Mar 10;26(8):1364-70
pubmed: 18323559
J Clin Oncol. 2006 Aug 20;24(24):3819-20
pubmed: 16864852
Clin Cancer Res. 2004 Nov 1;10(21):7252-9
pubmed: 15534099
BMC Cancer. 2020 Nov 25;20(1):1145
pubmed: 33238981
Medicine (Baltimore). 2020 Sep 4;99(36):e21802
pubmed: 32899008
Lancet. 2011 Aug 13;378(9791):607-20
pubmed: 21620466
Acta Oncol. 2016 Sep - Oct;55(9-10):1158-1160
pubmed: 27551890
Dis Model Mech. 2017 Sep 1;10(9):1061-1074
pubmed: 28883015
Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2016 Feb;98:309-24
pubmed: 26653573
Clin Nucl Med. 2001 Mar;26(3):230-1
pubmed: 11245116
Ann Nucl Med. 2005 Sep;19(6):491-7
pubmed: 16248386
BMC Cancer. 2019 Jul 17;19(1):704
pubmed: 31315606
JAMA. 2015 Jan 27;313(4):409-10
pubmed: 25626037
Clin Case Rep. 2019 Sep 05;7(10):1972-1976
pubmed: 31624620
Cancer Treat Rev. 2021 May;96:102180
pubmed: 33812339
J Clin Oncol. 2016 Jul 20;34(21):2534-40
pubmed: 27247223
Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2010 Jan 1;19(1):137-40
pubmed: 19708936
N Engl J Med. 2013 Oct 31;369(18):1691-703
pubmed: 24131140