Literature DB >> 29470818

Variability in Predictions from Online Tools: A Demonstration Using Internet-Based Melanoma Predictors.

Emily C Zabor1, Daniel Coit2, Jeffrey E Gershenwald3, Kelly M McMasters4, James S Michaelson5, Arnold J Stromberg6, Katherine S Panageas7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Prognostic models are increasingly being made available online, where they can be publicly accessed by both patients and clinicians. These online tools are an important resource for patients to better understand their prognosis and for clinicians to make informed decisions about treatment and follow-up. The goal of this analysis was to highlight the possible variability in multiple online prognostic tools in a single disease.
METHODS: To demonstrate the variability in survival predictions across online prognostic tools, we applied a single validation dataset to three online melanoma prognostic tools. Data on melanoma patients treated at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between 2000 and 2014 were retrospectively collected. Calibration was assessed using calibration plots and discrimination was assessed using the C-index.
RESULTS: In this demonstration project, we found important differences across the three models that led to variability in individual patients' predicted survival across the tools, especially in the lower range of predictions. In a validation test using a single-institution data set, calibration and discrimination varied across the three models.
CONCLUSIONS: This study underscores the potential variability both within and across online tools, and highlights the importance of using methodological rigor when developing a prognostic model that will be made publicly available online. The results also reinforce that careful development and thoughtful interpretation, including understanding a given tool's limitations, are required in order for online prognostic tools that provide survival predictions to be a useful resource for both patients and clinicians.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29470818      PMCID: PMC6219459          DOI: 10.1245/s10434-018-6370-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   5.344


  12 in total

Review 1.  Critical Assessment of Clinical Prognostic Tools in Melanoma.

Authors:  Alyson L Mahar; Carolyn Compton; Susan Halabi; Kenneth R Hess; Jeffrey E Gershenwald; Richard A Scolyer; Patti A Groome
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2016-04-06       Impact factor: 5.344

2.  A novel and accurate computer model of melanoma prognosis for patients staged by sentinel lymph node biopsy: comparison with the American Joint Committee on Cancer model.

Authors:  Glenda G Callender; Jeffrey E Gershenwald; Michael E Egger; Charles R Scoggins; Robert C G Martin; Christopher W Schacherer; Michael J Edwards; Marshall M Urist; Merrick I Ross; Arnold J Stromberg; Kelly M McMasters
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2012-02-17       Impact factor: 6.113

3.  American Joint Committee on Cancer acceptance criteria for inclusion of risk models for individualized prognosis in the practice of precision medicine.

Authors:  Michael W Kattan; Kenneth R Hess; Mahul B Amin; Ying Lu; Karl G M Moons; Jeffrey E Gershenwald; Phyllis A Gimotty; Justin H Guinney; Susan Halabi; Alexander J Lazar; Alyson L Mahar; Tushar Patel; Daniel J Sargent; Martin R Weiser; Carolyn Compton
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2016-01-19       Impact factor: 508.702

Review 4.  Predicting cancer prognosis using interactive online tools: a systematic review and implications for cancer care providers.

Authors:  Borsika A Rabin; Bridget Gaglio; Tristan Sanders; Larissa Nekhlyudov; James W Dearing; Sheana Bull; Russell E Glasgow; Alfred Marcus
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2013-08-16       Impact factor: 4.254

5.  Discrimination and Calibration of Clinical Prediction Models: Users' Guides to the Medical Literature.

Authors:  Ana Carolina Alba; Thomas Agoritsas; Michael Walsh; Steven Hanna; Alfonso Iorio; P J Devereaux; Thomas McGinn; Gordon Guyatt
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2017-10-10       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  The impact of primary tumor size, lymph node status, and other prognostic factors on the risk of cancer death.

Authors:  L Leon Chen; Matthew E Nolan; Melvin J Silverstein; Martin C Mihm; Arthur J Sober; Kenneth K Tanabe; Barbara L Smith; Jerry Younger; James S Michaelson
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2009-11-01       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Adjuvant Dabrafenib plus Trametinib in Stage III BRAF-Mutated Melanoma.

Authors:  Georgina V Long; Axel Hauschild; Mario Santinami; Victoria Atkinson; Mario Mandalà; Vanna Chiarion-Sileni; James Larkin; Marta Nyakas; Caroline Dutriaux; Andrew Haydon; Caroline Robert; Laurent Mortier; Jacob Schachter; Dirk Schadendorf; Thierry Lesimple; Ruth Plummer; Ran Ji; Pingkuan Zhang; Bijoyesh Mookerjee; Jeff Legos; Richard Kefford; Reinhard Dummer; John M Kirkwood
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2017-09-10       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Why cancer at the primary site and in the lymph nodes contributes to the risk of cancer death.

Authors:  James S Michaelson; L Leon Chen; Melvin J Silverstein; Justin A Cheongsiatmoy; Martin C Mihm; Arthur J Sober; Kenneth K Tanabe; Barbara L Smith; Jerry Younger
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2009-11-01       Impact factor: 6.860

9.  How cancer at the primary site and in the lymph nodes contributes to the risk of cancer death.

Authors:  James S Michaelson; L Leon Chen; Melvin J Silverstein; Martin C Mihm; Arthur J Sober; Kenneth K Tanabe; Barbara L Smith; Jerry Younger
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2009-11-01       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  Final version of 2009 AJCC melanoma staging and classification.

Authors:  Charles M Balch; Jeffrey E Gershenwald; Seng-Jaw Soong; John F Thompson; Michael B Atkins; David R Byrd; Antonio C Buzaid; Alistair J Cochran; Daniel G Coit; Shouluan Ding; Alexander M Eggermont; Keith T Flaherty; Phyllis A Gimotty; John M Kirkwood; Kelly M McMasters; Martin C Mihm; Donald L Morton; Merrick I Ross; Arthur J Sober; Vernon K Sondak
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-11-16       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  4 in total

1.  Identification of stage I/IIA melanoma patients at high risk for disease relapse using a clinicopathologic and gene expression model.

Authors:  Alexander M M Eggermont; Domenico Bellomo; Suzette M Arias-Mejias; Enrica Quattrocchi; Sindhuja Sominidi-Damodaran; Alina G Bridges; Julia S Lehman; Tina J Hieken; James W Jakub; Dennis H Murphree; Mark R Pittelkow; Jason C Sluzevich; Mark A Cappel; Sanjay P Bagaria; Charles Perniciaro; Félicia J Tjien-Fooh; Barbara Rentroia-Pacheco; Renske Wever; Martin H van Vliet; Jvalini Dwarkasing; Alexander Meves
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2020-10-05       Impact factor: 9.162

2.  Improved Risk Prediction Calculator for Sentinel Node Positivity in Patients With Melanoma: The Melanoma Institute Australia Nomogram.

Authors:  Serigne N Lo; Jiawen Ma; Richard A Scolyer; Lauren E Haydu; Jonathan R Stretch; Robyn P M Saw; Omgo E Nieweg; Kerwin F Shannon; Andrew J Spillane; Sydney Ch'ng; Graham J Mann; Jeffrey E Gershenwald; John F Thompson; Alexander H R Varey
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2020-06-12       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  ASO Author Reflections: Careful Development and Thoughtful Interpretation are Needed when Developing Online Prognostic Tools.

Authors:  Emily C Zabor
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 5.344

4.  Development and validation of a nomogram to predict recurrence and melanoma-specific mortality in patients with negative sentinel lymph nodes.

Authors:  D Verver; D van Klaveren; V Franke; A C J van Akkooi; P Rutkowski; U Keilholz; A M M Eggermont; T Nijsten; D J Grünhagen; C Verhoef
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2018-10-11       Impact factor: 6.939

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.