Literature DB >> 20881767

A clinical nomogram predicting pathologic lymph node involvement in esophageal cancer patients.

Puja Gaur1, Boris Sepesi, Wayne L Hofstetter, Arlene M Correa, Manoop S Bhutani, Ara A Vaporciyan, Thomas J Watson, Stephen G Swisher.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Esophageal cancer patients with pathologic lymph-node involvement (pN1) generally have a poor prognosis with surgery alone. We, therefore, constructed a nomogram to predict the risk of pN1 prior to surgical resection and externally validated the clinical utility of the model.
METHODS: A total of 273 esophageal adenocarcinoma patients treated with surgery alone were reviewed from 2 different institutions (University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center = 164, training set; University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry = 109, validation set). Pretreatment clinical parameters were used to construct a nomogram for predicting the risk of pN1. Internal and external validation of the nomogram was performed to assess clinical utility.
RESULTS: Of the 164 patients in the training set, 56 patients (34%) had lymph-node involvement (pN1). Significant factors associated with pN1 on univariable logistic regression analysis (using a P < 0.05) included endoscopically determined clinical tumor depth (cT), clinical nodal (cN) status, and clinical tumor length (cL). Multivariable analysis suggested the significant independent factors were cT (odds ratio, 5.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-18.6; P < 0.01) and cL >2 cm (odds ratio, 7.0; 95% confidence interval, 2.7-18.1; P < 0.001). Regression tree analysis was used to determine the best cutoff for cL. A nomogram was created for pN1 using these clinical parameters and was internally validated by bootstrapping with a predicted accuracy of 85.1%. External validation performed on the validation set demonstrated an original C-index of 0.777 suggesting good clinical utility.
CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses demonstrate that the risk of pathologic nodal involvement in esophageal adenocarcinoma patients can be estimated by this clinical nomogram, which will allow the identification of patients at high-risk of harboring positive lymph-nodes, who may be candidates for en bloc resection and/or neoadjuvant treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20881767     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181f56419

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  13 in total

1.  Novel Calculator to Estimate Overall Survival Benefit from Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation in Patients with Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Emmanuel Gabriel; Kristopher Attwood; Rupen Shah; Steven Nurkin; Steven Hochwald; Moshim Kukar
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2017-01-29       Impact factor: 6.113

2.  Recurrence risk model for esophageal cancer after radical surgery.

Authors:  Jincheng Lu; Hua Tao; Dan Song; Cheng Chen
Journal:  Chin J Cancer Res       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 5.087

3.  Predictors of Nodal Metastases for Clinical T2N0 Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Arianna Barbetta; Francisco Schlottmann; Tamar Nobel; David B Sewell; Meier Hsu; Kay See Tan; Hans Gerdes; Pari Shah; Manjit S Bains; Matthew Bott; James M Isbell; David R Jones; Daniela Molena
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2018-04-05       Impact factor: 4.330

4.  Tumour size of resectable oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma measured with multidetector computed tomography for predicting regional lymph node metastasis and N stage.

Authors:  Hang Li; Tian-wu Chen; Zhen-lin Li; Xiao-ming Zhang; Xiao-li Chen; Li-ying Wang; Li Zhou; Rui Li; Chun-ping Li; Xiao-hua Huang
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2012-06-01       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Clinical evaluation of right recurrent laryngeal nerve nodes in thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Zhen-Xuan Li; Xiao-Dong Li; Xian-Ben Liu; Wen-Qun Xing; Hai-Bo Sun; Zong-Fei Wang; Rui-Xiang Zhang; Yin Li
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2020-07       Impact factor: 2.895

6.  Relationship Between the Size of Metastatic Lymph Nodes and Positron Emission Tomographic/Computer Tomographic Findings in Patients with Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  Seong Yong Park; Dae Joon Kim; Hee Suk Jung; Mi Jin Yun; Jeong Won Lee; Cheol Keun Park
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Three-gene immunohistochemical panel adds to clinical staging algorithms to predict prognosis for patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Chin-Ann J Ong; Joel Shapiro; Katie S Nason; Jon M Davison; Xinxue Liu; Caryn Ross-Innes; Maria O'Donovan; Winand N M Dinjens; Katharina Biermann; Nicholas Shannon; Susannah Worster; Laura K E Schulz; James D Luketich; Bas P L Wijnhoven; Richard H Hardwick; Rebecca C Fitzgerald
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-03-18       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Prognostic nomogram for previously untreated patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after esophagectomy followed by adjuvant chemotherapy.

Authors:  Jingjing Duan; Ting Deng; Guoguang Ying; Dingzhi Huang; Haiyang Zhang; Likun Zhou; Ming Bai; Hongli Li; Huimin Yang; Yanjun Qu; Xia Wang; Yi Ba
Journal:  Jpn J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-01-26       Impact factor: 3.019

9.  Significance of tumor length as prognostic factor for esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Arife Zeybek; Abdullah Erdoğan; Kemal Hakan Gülkesen; Makbule Ergin; Alpay Sarper; Levent Dertsiz; Abid Demircan
Journal:  Int Surg       Date:  2013 Jul-Sep

10.  A nomogram associated with high probability of malignant nodes in the surgical specimen after trimodality therapy of patients with oesophageal cancer.

Authors:  Yuki Hayashi; Lianchun Xiao; Akihiro Suzuki; Mariela A Blum; Bradley Sabloff; Takashi Taketa; Dipen M Maru; James Welsh; Steven H Lin; Brian Weston; Jeffrey H Lee; Manoop S Bhutani; Wayne L Hofstetter; Stephen G Swisher; Jaffer A Ajani
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2012-07-31       Impact factor: 9.162

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.