Literature DB >> 16234519

Validation of a postresection pancreatic adenocarcinoma nomogram for disease-specific survival.

Cristina R Ferrone1, Michael W Kattan, James S Tomlinson, Sarah P Thayer, Murray F Brennan, Andrew L Warshaw.   

Abstract

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.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16234519      PMCID: PMC3903268          DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.01.8101

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  11 in total

1.  Validation of the Gail et al. model of breast cancer risk prediction and implications for chemoprevention.

Authors:  B Rockhill; D Spiegelman; C Byrne; D J Hunter; G A Colditz
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2001-03-07       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Postoperative nomogram for 12-year sarcoma-specific death.

Authors:  Michael W Kattan; Denis H Y Leung; Murray F Brennan
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2002-02-01       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  A preoperative nomogram for disease recurrence following radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  M W Kattan; J A Eastham; A M Stapleton; T M Wheeler; P T Scardino
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1998-05-20       Impact factor: 13.506

4.  Evaluating the yield of medical tests.

Authors:  F E Harrell; R M Califf; D B Pryor; K L Lee; R A Rosati
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1982-05-14       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Postoperative nomogram for disease-specific survival after an R0 resection for gastric carcinoma.

Authors:  Michael W Kattan; Martin S Karpeh; Madhu Mazumdar; Murray F Brennan
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2003-10-01       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 6.  Adjuvant therapy following resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Murray F Brennan
Journal:  Surg Oncol Clin N Am       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 3.495

7.  Prognostic nomogram for patients undergoing resection for adenocarcinoma of the pancreas.

Authors:  Murray F Brennan; Michael W Kattan; David Klimstra; Kevin Conlon
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Prognostic indicators for survival after resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  R J Geer; M F Brennan
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 2.565

Review 9.  Prognostic factors in ductal pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  C J Yeo; J L Cameron
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 3.445

10.  Carcinoma of the body and tail of the pancreas: is curative resection justified?

Authors:  R R Dalton; M G Sarr; J A van Heerden; T V Colby
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 3.982

View more
  46 in total

1.  The influence of positive peritoneal cytology on survival in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

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

2.  Re-evaluating the impact of tumor size on survival following pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

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

Review 3.  Biomarkers in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  J Gallego; C López; R Pazo-Cid; F López-Ríos; A Carrato
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 3.405

4.  Nomogram predicting long-term survival after the diagnosis of intrahepatic recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma following an initial liver resection.

Authors:  Tsuyoshi Notake; Akira Kobayashi; Hiroji Shinkawa; Takuya Kawahara; Akira Shimizu; Takahide Yokoyama; Kiyoshi Hasegawa; Norihiro Kokudo; Yutaka Matsuyama; Masatoshi Makuuchi; Shin-Ichi Miyagawa
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-03-16       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  Pulmonary resection for isolated pancreatic adenocarcinoma metastasis: an analysis of outcomes and survival.

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

6.  CREPT serves as a biomarker of poor survival in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Gang Yang; Yicheng Wang; Jianchun Xiao; Fangyu Zhao; Jiangdong Qiu; Yueze Liu; Guangyu Chen; Zhe Cao; Lei You; Lianfang Zheng; Taiping Zhang; Yupei Zhao
Journal:  Cell Oncol (Dordr)       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 6.730

7.  Is tumour size an underestimated feature in the current TNM system for malignancies of the pancreatic head?

Authors:  David Petermann; Nicolas Demartines; Markus Schäfer
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2013-01-29       Impact factor: 3.647

8.  Pancreatic cancer and predictors of survival: comparing the CA 19-9/bilirubin ratio with the McGill Brisbane Symptom Score.

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

9.  Loss of heterozygosity predicts poor survival after resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

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

10.  Impact of tumor grade on prognosis in pancreatic cancer: should we include grade in AJCC staging?

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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.