Dataset Information

Development and validation of a prognostic scoring model for mortality risk stratification in patients with recurrent or metastatic gastric carcinoma.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Survival times differ among patients with advanced gastric carcinoma. A precise and universal prognostic evaluation strategy has not yet been established. The current study aimed to construct a prognostic scoring model for mortality risk stratification in patients with advanced gastric carcinoma.

Methods

Patients with advanced gastric carcinoma from two hospitals (development and validation cohort) were included. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was conducted to identify independent risk factors for survival. A prognostic nomogram model was developed using R statistics and validated both in bootstrap and external cohort. The concordance index and calibration curves were plotted to determine the discrimination and calibration of the model, respectively. The nomogram score and a simplified scoring system were developed to stratify patients in the two cohorts.

Results

Development and validation cohort was comprised of 401 and 214 gastric cancer patients, respectively. Mucinous or non-mucinous histology, ECOG score, bone metastasis, ascites, hemoglobin concentration, serum albumin level, lactate dehydrogenase level, carcinoembryonic antigen level, and chemotherapy were finally incorporated into prognostic nomogram. The concordance indices were 0.689 (95% CI: 0.664 ~ 0.714) and 0.673 (95% CI: 0.632 ~ 0.714) for bootstrap and external validation. 100 and 200 were set as the cut-off values of nomogram score, patients in development cohort were stratified into low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups with median overall survival time 15.8 (95% CI: 12.2 ~ 19.5), 8.4 (95% CI: 6.7 ~ 10.2), and 3.9 (95% CI: 2.7 ~ 5.2) months, respectively; the cut-off values also worked well in validation cohort with different survival time in subgroups. A simplified model was also established and showed good consistency with the nomogram scoring model in both of development and validation cohorts.

Conclusion

The prognostic scoring model and its simplified surrogate can be used as tools for mortality risk stratification in patients with advanced gastric carcinoma.

SUBMITTER: Ma T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8666033 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Development and validation of a prognostic scoring model for mortality risk stratification in patients with recurrent or metastatic gastric carcinoma.

Ma Tai T Wu Zhijun Z Zhang Xiaopeng X Xu Hui H Feng Ying Y Zhang Cheng C Xie Minmin M Yang Yahui Y Zhang Yi Y Feng Chong C Sun Guoping G

BMC cancer 20211212 1

<h4>Background</h4>Survival times differ among patients with advanced gastric carcinoma. A precise and universal prognostic evaluation strategy has not yet been established. The current study aimed to construct a prognostic scoring model for mortality risk stratification in patients with advanced gastric carcinoma.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients with advanced gastric carcinoma from two hospitals (development and validation cohort) were included. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was conducte ...[more]

PMID: 34895168

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn recent years, the addition of cetuximab to chemotherapy has improved treatment outcomes for patients with recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (R/M HNSCC). In this study, we present the real-world survival data of R/M HNSCC patients who received cetuximab-containing regimens from thirteen medical centers in Taiwan, as well as a three-level risk stratification model for this patient population.MethodsThis study enrolled R/M HNSCC patients from thirteen medical centers in Taiwan who received cetuximab-containing regimens from January 1, 2017 to June 6, 2022. The cases were divided into a training cohort and a validation cohort based on the start of treatment. Overall survival (OS) was evaluated in both cohorts and exploratory analysis was performed to identify associated adverse clinical and laboratory factors. The results of the exploratory analysis were used to construct a three-level risk stratification prediction model for OS.ResultsA total of 1434 patients with R/M HNSCC were enrolled in this study and received cetuximab-containing regimens. The overall population had a median OS of 8.57 months (95% CI: 8.07 - 9.08). Multivariate analysis of the training cohort identified poor ECOG performance status, heavy alcohol consumption, and prior adjuvant CCRT or lack of prior RT as adverse prognostic factors. Comparison of laboratory data between patients with OS≦6 and OS > 6 also revealed unfavorable factors, including increased white blood cell count, decreased hemoglobin level, increased platelet count, increased absolute neutrophil count, decreased absolute lymphocyte count, and increased neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio. Using forward prediction, a three-level risk stratification prediction model was constructed using the variables of ECOG performance status, alcohol consumption, skin metastasis, modality of radiation therapy, hemoglobin level, and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio. The median OS in the low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk groups were 12.02 months (95% CI 10.44-13.61), 7.5 months (95% CI 7.33-8.17), and 4.01 months (95% CI 3.94-4.08), respectively, with a log-rank test p-value < 0.001.ConclusionThis study presents a three-level risk stratification model with strong prediction ability for OS in R/M HNSCC patients who received cetuximab-containing regimens. The results are based on real-world data and may provide valuable information for clinicians in treatment planning and future drug development.

Project description:Accurate prediction of outcome for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients receiving targeted therapy is essential. Most of the available models have been developed in patients treated with cytokines, while most of them are fairly complex, including at least five factors. We developed and externally validated a simple model for overall survival (OS) in mRCC. We also studied the recently validated International Database Consortium (IDC) model in our data sets.The development cohort included 170 mRCC patients treated with sunitinib. The final prognostic model was selected by uni- and multivariate Cox regression analyses. Risk groups were defined by the number of risk factors and by the 25th and 75th percentiles of the model's prognostic index distribution. The model was validated using an independent data set of 266 mRCC patients (validation cohort) treated with the same agent.Eastern Co-operative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS), time from diagnosis of RCC and number of metastatic sites were included in the final model. Median OS of patients with 1, 2 and 3 risk factors were: 24.7, 12.8 and 5.9 months, respectively, whereas median OS was not reached for patients with 0 risk factors. Concordance (C) index for internal validation was 0.712, whereas C-index for external validation was 0.634, due to differences in survival especially in poor-risk populations between the two cohorts. Predictive performance of the model was improved after recalibration. Application of the mRCC International Database Consortium (IDC) model resulted in a C-index of 0.574 in the development and 0.576 in the validation cohorts (lower than those recently reported for this model). Predictive ability was also improved after recalibration in this analysis. Risk stratification according to IDC model showed more similar outcomes across the development and validation cohorts compared with our model.Our model provides a simple prognostic tool in mRCC patients treated with a targeted agent. It had similar performance with the IDC model, which, however, produced more consistent survival results across the development and validation cohorts. The predictive ability of both models was lower than that suggested by internal validation (our model) or recent published data (IDC model), due to differences between observed and predicted survival among intermediate and poor-risk patients. Our results highlight the importance of external validation and the need for further refinement of existing prognostic models.

Project description:ObjectiveTo develop and validate a simple-to-use prognostic scoring model based on clinical and pathological features which can predict overall survival (OS) of patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) and facilitate personalized treatment planning.Materials and methodsOSCC patients (n = 404) from a public hospital were divided into a training cohort (n = 282) and an internal validation cohort (n = 122). A total of 12 clinical and pathological features were included in Kaplan-Meier analysis to identify the factors associated with OS. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was performed to further identify important variables and establish prognostic models. Nomogram was generated to predict the individual's 1-, 3- and 5-year OS rates. The performance of the prognostic scoring model was compared with that of the pathological one and the AJCC TNM staging system by the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC), concordance index (C-index), calibration curve, and decision curve analysis (DCA). Patients were classified into high- and low-risk groups according to the risk scores of the nomogram. The nomogram-illustrated model was independently tested in an external validation cohort of 95 patients.ResultsFour significant variables (physical examination-tumor size, imaging examination-tumor size, pathological nodal involvement stage, and histologic grade) were included into the nomogram-illustrated model (clinical-pathological model). The area under the ROC curve (AUC) of the clinical-pathological model was 0.687, 0.719, and 0.722 for 1-, 3- and 5-year survival, respectively, which was superior to that of the pathological model (AUC = 0.649, 0.707, 0.717, respectively) and AJCC TNM staging system (AUC = 0.628, 0.668, 0.677, respectively). The clinical-pathological model exhibited improved discriminative power compared with pathological model and AJCC TNM staging system (C-index = 0.755, 0.702, 0.642, respectively) in the external validation cohort. The calibration curves and DCA also displayed excellent predictive performances.ConclusionThis clinical and pathological feature based prognostic scoring model showed better predictive ability compared with the pathological one, which would be a useful tool of personalized accurate risk stratification and precision therapy planning for OSCC patients.

Dataset Information

Development and validation of a prognostic scoring model for mortality risk stratification in patients with recurrent or metastatic gastric carcinoma.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Development and validation of a prognostic scoring model for mortality risk stratification in patients with recurrent or metastatic gastric carcinoma.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets