Peishu Liu1, Xiaolei Zhang2, Xiaodie Liu3,4, Yaohai Wu5,6. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, 250012, China. peishuliu@126.com. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, 250012, China. drjyzxl@foxmail.com. 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, 250012, China. 4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100029, China. 5. Department of Urology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, 250012, China. 6. Department of Urology, Seventh Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Shenzhen, 518107, People's Republic of China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore risk factors and develop a prediction model for ovarian metastasis in endometrial cancer (EC), as well as providing provide a reference for clinical ovarian preservation. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study enrolling 1496 EC patients having received complete staging surgery from Qilu Hospital of Shandong University from 2012 to 2018. These patients were randomly divided into two cohorts: training cohort (n = 1046) and validation cohort (n = 448). A nomogram prediction model was developed based on univariate, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (Lasso), and multivariate logistic regression. Then, the nomogram model's performance was evaluated in discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility three aspects. RESULTS: Parametrium invasion, lymph node metastasis, and oviduct metastasis were finally contained in the nomogram prediction model. The AUC of the model in the training cohort was 0.85 compared with 0.72 in the validation cohort. It also behaved well in calibration and had good clinical utility. With a threshold probability of 20% ~ 80%, the nomogram increased the net benefit by 0 ~ 13.6 per 100 patients than surgery for all patients upon validation. CONCLUSIONS: We develop a nomogram with good performances for predicting ovarian metastasis in EC patients, which may help clinicians identify candidate patients appropriate for ovarian preservation in premenopausal EC patients.
OBJECTIVE: To explore risk factors and develop a prediction model for ovarian metastasis in endometrial cancer (EC), as well as providing provide a reference for clinical ovarian preservation. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study enrolling 1496 EC patients having received complete staging surgery from Qilu Hospital of Shandong University from 2012 to 2018. These patients were randomly divided into two cohorts: training cohort (n = 1046) and validation cohort (n = 448). A nomogram prediction model was developed based on univariate, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (Lasso), and multivariate logistic regression. Then, the nomogram model's performance was evaluated in discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility three aspects. RESULTS: Parametrium invasion, lymph node metastasis, and oviduct metastasis were finally contained in the nomogram prediction model. The AUC of the model in the training cohort was 0.85 compared with 0.72 in the validation cohort. It also behaved well in calibration and had good clinical utility. With a threshold probability of 20% ~ 80%, the nomogram increased the net benefit by 0 ~ 13.6 per 100 patients than surgery for all patients upon validation. CONCLUSIONS: We develop a nomogram with good performances for predicting ovarian metastasis in EC patients, which may help clinicians identify candidate patients appropriate for ovarian preservation in premenopausal EC patients.
Authors: M M AlHilli; S C Dowdy; A L Weaver; J L St Sauver; G L Keeney; A Mariani; K C Podratz; J N Bakkum-Gamez Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2011-12-28 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Nita Karnik Lee; Michael K Cheung; Jacob Y Shin; Amreen Husain; Nelson N Teng; Jonathan S Berek; Daniel S Kapp; Kathryn Osann; John K Chan Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Tanja Ignatov; Holm Eggemann; Elke Burger; Olaf Ortmann; Serban Dan Costa; Atanas Ignatov Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2018-03-14 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Stephanie M de Boer; Melanie E Powell; Linda Mileshkin; Dionyssios Katsaros; Paul Bessette; Christine Haie-Meder; Petronella B Ottevanger; Jonathan A Ledermann; Pearly Khaw; Romerai D'Amico; Anthony Fyles; Marie-Helene Baron; Ina M Jürgenliemk-Schulz; Henry C Kitchener; Hans W Nijman; Godfrey Wilson; Susan Brooks; Sergio Gribaudo; Diane Provencher; Chantal Hanzen; Roy F Kruitwagen; Vincent T H B M Smit; Naveena Singh; Viet Do; Andrea Lissoni; Remi A Nout; Amanda Feeney; Karen W Verhoeven-Adema; Hein Putter; Carien L Creutzberg Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2019-07-22 Impact factor: 41.316