A preoperative nomogram predicts prognosis of up front resectable patients with pancreatic head cancer and suspected venous invasion

Shen, Yang; Bai, Xuan; Liang, Tingbo

doi:10.1016/j.hpb.2018.06.1956

Cited by 4 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The number of model development studies, with (n=3)18–20 and without (n=12) external validation,21–32 increased sharply in recent years (figure 2). Multivariable Cox regression proportional hazard regression was the most commonly employed modelling method (n=13)18–25 27–29 31 32 with two studies employing alternative machine learning techniques (Bayesian model: n=1; Artificial Neural Network (ANN): n=1) 26 30. Six models could be applied preoperatively 19 23 24 27 28 31.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Six models could be applied preoperatively 19 23 24 27 28 31. Five studies focused on predicting poor prognosis (survival time under 7 months n=1, under 9 months n=1, under 12 months n=2, 6, 12 and 18 months survival n=1) 18 19 23 26 27. One model predicted prognosis of 3 years or more 32.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Five studies used data from prospectively maintained databases,19 20 22 27 29 with one of these studies collecting data prospectively alongside clinical trials 29. Seven studies used retrospective data 18 23–26 28 31. Three studies used data from the cancer data registry 21 30 32.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Length of follow-up time was clear in 14 studies 18–20 22–32. Consecutive sampling was reported in three studies18 24 26 but whether all consecutive participants were included, or number of participants who refused to participate, could not be evaluated as this was rarely reported across all studies. Non-consecutive sampling can introduce a risk of bias 33–35.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A systematic review of methodological quality of model development studies predicting prognostic outcome for resectable pancreatic cancer

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo assess the methodological quality of prognostic model development studies pertaining to post resection prognosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).Design/settingA narrative systematic review of international peer reviewed journalsData sourceSearches were conducted of: MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane database and Google Scholar for predictive modelling studies applied to the outcome of prognosis for patients with PDAC post resection. Predictive modelling studies in this context included prediction model development studies with and without external validation and external validation studies with model updating. Data was extracted following the Checklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS) checklist.Primary and secondary outcome measuresPrimary outcomes were all components of the CHARMS checklist. Secondary outcomes included frequency of variables included across predictive models.Results263 studies underwent full text review. 15 studies met the inclusion criteria. 3 studies underwent external validation. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression was the most commonly employed modelling method (n=13). 10 studies were based on single centre databases. Five used prospective databases, seven used retrospective databases and three used cancer data registry. The mean number of candidate predictors was 19.47 (range 7 to 50). The most commonly included variables were tumour grade (n=9), age (n=8), tumour stage (n=7) and tumour size (n=5). Mean sample size was 1367 (range 50 to 6400). 5 studies reached statistical power. None of the studies reported blinding of outcome measurement for predictor values. The most common form of presentation was nomograms (n=5) and prognostic scores (n=5) followed by prognostic calculators (n=3) and prognostic index (n=2).ConclusionsAreas for improvement in future predictive model development have been highlighted relating to: general aspects of model development and reporting, applicability of models and sources of bias.Trial registration numberCRD42018105942

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A systematic review of methodological quality of model development studies predicting prognostic outcome for resectable pancreatic cancer

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, many patients were diagnosed at their older ages and the increasing ages might have an impact on their survival. However, previous stage systems only considered OS, ignoring to evaluate the prognostic impact of age (24)(25)(26). Thus, in this study, we sought to evaluate the demographic, clinical, and pathological features of LAPC patients after IRE treatment and establish prognostic nomograms to predict OS, CSS, and NCSS.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Novel Prediction Tool Based on Large Cohorts to Determine the Cancer-Specific Survival Probability of Patients With Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer After Irreversible Electroporation Treatment

Huang

Lin

et al. 2020

Front. Oncol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Irreversible electroporation (IRE) is a novel method which was especially suitable for the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). The purpose of this study was to evaluate probabilities of overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) in patients with LAPC after IRE treatment and to construct nomograms to predict survival for these patients. Data of patients were retrospectively collected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database and medical records of Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center (SYSUCC). A total of 312 LAPC patients after IRE treatment were included into this study. The 3-year cumulative incidence of cancer-specific mortality for patients with LAPC after IRE treatment was 74.3%. Nomograms for predicting probabilities of OS, CSS, and non-cancer-specific survival (NCSS) were built and calibrated with the concordance index (C-index) and the area under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC). The established nomograms were well-calibrated, with C-indexes of 0.782 for OS prediction, 0.729 for CSS prediction, and 0.730 for NCSS prediction. Compared with the TNM stage system, the established nomograms displayed higher values of AUC and showed better discriminatory power for predicting OS, CSS, and NCSS. These nomograms were well-calibrated and could serve to guide management of LAPC patients after IRE treatment.

show abstract

Radical Resection Combined With Intestinal Autotransplantation for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer After Neoadjuvant Therapy

Liang

et al. 2023

Annals of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To achieve radical resection of locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), and tested the safety and benefits of intestinal autotransplantation in pancreatic surgery. Background: PDAC has an extremely dismal prognosis. Radical resection was proved to improve the prognosis of patients with PDAC; however, the locally advanced disease had a very low resection rate currently. We explored and evaluated whether the combination of modern advances in systemic treatment and this macroinvasive surgery was feasible in clinical practice. Methods: Patients diagnosed as PDAC with superior mesenteric artery involvement and with or without celiac trunk involvement were included. Patients were treated with modified-FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy with or without anti-PD-1 antibodies and were applied to tumor resection combined with intestinal autotransplantation. Data on operative parameters, pathologic results, mortality, morbidity, and survival were analyzed. Results: A total of 36 consecutive cases were applied to this strategy and underwent radical resection combined with intestinal autotransplantation. Among these patients, 24 of them received the Whipple procedure, 11 patients received total pancreatectomy, and the other 1 patient received distal pancreatectomy. The median operation time was 539 minutes. Postoperative pathology showed an R0 resection rate of 94.4%, and tumor invasion of a superior mesenteric artery or superior mesenteric vein was confirmed in 32 patients. The median number of dissected lymph nodes was 43, and 25 patients were positive for lymph node metastasis. The median time of intensive care unit From the

show abstract

A preoperative nomogram predicts prognosis of up front resectable patients with pancreatic head cancer and suspected venous invasion

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

A systematic review of methodological quality of model development studies predicting prognostic outcome for resectable pancreatic cancer

A systematic review of methodological quality of model development studies predicting prognostic outcome for resectable pancreatic cancer

A Novel Prediction Tool Based on Large Cohorts to Determine the Cancer-Specific Survival Probability of Patients With Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer After Irreversible Electroporation Treatment

Radical Resection Combined With Intestinal Autotransplantation for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer After Neoadjuvant Therapy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About