PURPOSE: Nomograms are statistically based tools that provide the overall probability of a specific outcome. They have shown better individual discrimination than the current TNM staging system in numerous patient tumor models. The pancreatic nomogram combines individual clinicopathologic and operative data to predict disease-specific survival at 1, 2, and 3 years from initial resection. A single US institution database was used to test the validity of the pancreatic adenocarcinoma nomogram established at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The nomogram was created from a prospective pancreatic adenocarcinoma database that included 555 consecutive patients between October 1983 and April 2000. The nomogram was validated by an external patient cohort from a retrospective pancreatic adenocarcinoma database at Massachusetts General Hospital that included 424 consecutive patients between January 1985 and December 2003. RESULTS: Of the 424 patients, 375 had all variables documented. At last follow-up, 99 patients were alive, with a median follow-up time of 27 months (range, 2 to 151 months). The 1-, 2-, and 3-year disease-specific survival rates were 68% (95% CI, 63% to 72%), 39% (95% CI, 34% to 44%), and 27% (95% CI, 23% to 32%), respectively. The nomogram concordance index was 0.62 compared with 0.59 with the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage (P = .004). This suggests that the nomogram discriminates disease-specific survival better than the AJCC staging system. CONCLUSION: The pancreatic cancer nomogram provides more accurate survival predictions than the AJCC staging system when applied to an external patient cohort. The nomogram may aid in more accurately counseling patients and in better stratifying patients for clinical trials and molecular tumor analysis.
PURPOSE: Nomograms are statistically based tools that provide the overall probability of a specific outcome. They have shown better individual discrimination than the current TNM staging system in numerous patienttumor models. The pancreatic nomogram combines individual clinicopathologic and operative data to predict disease-specific survival at 1, 2, and 3 years from initial resection. A single US institution database was used to test the validity of the pancreatic adenocarcinoma nomogram established at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The nomogram was created from a prospective pancreatic adenocarcinoma database that included 555 consecutive patients between October 1983 and April 2000. The nomogram was validated by an external patient cohort from a retrospective pancreatic adenocarcinoma database at Massachusetts General Hospital that included 424 consecutive patients between January 1985 and December 2003. RESULTS: Of the 424 patients, 375 had all variables documented. At last follow-up, 99 patients were alive, with a median follow-up time of 27 months (range, 2 to 151 months). The 1-, 2-, and 3-year disease-specific survival rates were 68% (95% CI, 63% to 72%), 39% (95% CI, 34% to 44%), and 27% (95% CI, 23% to 32%), respectively. The nomogram concordance index was 0.62 compared with 0.59 with the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage (P = .004). This suggests that the nomogram discriminates disease-specific survival better than the AJCC staging system. CONCLUSION: The pancreatic cancer nomogram provides more accurate survival predictions than the AJCC staging system when applied to an external patient cohort. The nomogram may aid in more accurately counseling patients and in better stratifying patients for clinical trials and molecular tumor analysis.
Authors: Cristina R Ferrone; Barbara Haas; Laura Tang; Daniel G Coit; Yuman Fong; Murray F Brennan; Peter J Allen Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Mechteld C de Jong; Fuyu Li; John L Cameron; Christopher L Wolfgang; Barish H Edil; Joseph M Herman; Michael A Choti; Frederick Eckhauser; Kenzo Hirose; Richard D Schulick; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2011-01-31 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: George J Arnaoutakis; Deepa Rangachari; Daniel A Laheru; Chris A Iacobuzio-Donahue; Ralph H Hruban; Joseph M Herman; Barish H Edil; Timothy M Pawlik; Richard D Schulick; John L Cameron; Avedis Meneshian; Stephen C Yang; Christopher L Wolfgang Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2011-07-02 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Sinziana Dumitra; Mohammad H Jamal; Jad Aboukhalil; Suhail A Doi; Prosanto Chaudhury; Mazen Hassanain; Peter P Metrakos; Jeffrey S Barkun Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2013-03-22 Impact factor: 3.647
Authors: Jan Franko; Alyssa M Krasinskas; Marina N Nikiforova; Narcis O Zarnescu; Kenneth K W Lee; Steven J Hughes; David L Bartlett; Herbert J Zeh; A James Moser Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2008-08-02 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Nabil Wasif; Clifford Y Ko; James Farrell; Zev Wainberg; Oscar J Hines; Howard Reber; James S Tomlinson Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2010-04-27 Impact factor: 5.344