2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2019.12.023
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

International validation and update of the Amsterdam model for prediction of survival after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

4
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
19
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Due to these weak correlations, a cohort size of nearly 8000 patients was necessary to establish statistical significance [9]. In contrast, in the present study, the HR for CTCs was 3.7 (95% CI 1.7-8.3, p=.001), exhibiting a strength of correlation commonly found for histopathologial factors [26,27]. Comparing the prediction strength, patients falling into the high-risk group of the PDAC-nomogram had a predicted median OS of less than 1.5 years, while the present study shows a median CSS of 6.63 months for CTC-positive patients, indicating a stronger survival impact by CTCs.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 69%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Due to these weak correlations, a cohort size of nearly 8000 patients was necessary to establish statistical significance [9]. In contrast, in the present study, the HR for CTCs was 3.7 (95% CI 1.7-8.3, p=.001), exhibiting a strength of correlation commonly found for histopathologial factors [26,27]. Comparing the prediction strength, patients falling into the high-risk group of the PDAC-nomogram had a predicted median OS of less than 1.5 years, while the present study shows a median CSS of 6.63 months for CTC-positive patients, indicating a stronger survival impact by CTCs.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 69%
“…However, "in-between study comparisons" should be interpreted with caution. For postoperative prediction, the Amsterdam model [27], with its recent update [26] achieves excellent survival prediction. This was obtained by combining histopathological factors together with information about the completion of adjuvant therapy.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To develop a nomogram predicting 5-year survival, the predictors of the previously published and externally validated Amsterdam model were used. 14,22 This model was used because of its simplicity and methodological quality according to a recent systematic review and to maintain consistency with previous studies. 14,23 The Amsterdam model uses adjuvant chemotherapy, margin status, tumor differentiation, and lymph node ratio to predict overall survival for patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, in oncological liver surgery, one would like to have a system that combines patient information (laboratory results, imaging, comorbidities, and previous surgeries) with evidence-based information (scientific publications) and surgical experience (the clinical course of previously treated patients) to avoid post-hepatectomy liver failure or to choose the optimal multimodal treatment. Similarly, AI may help to improve systems of predictive analytics that estimate survival after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer [47] or secondary effects of surgery, such as incisional hernia [48].…”
Section: Potential Effects Of Ai In Surgerymentioning
confidence: 99%