» Articles » PMID: 32873257

Calculating the Overall Survival Probability in Patients with Cervical Cancer: a Nomogram and Decision Curve Analysis-based Study

Overview
Journal BMC Cancer
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Oncology
Date 2020 Sep 3
PMID 32873257
Citations 20
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Cervical cancer has long been a common malignance troubling women. However, there are few studies developing nomogram with comprehensive factors for the prognosis of cervical cancer. Hence, we aimed to build a nomogram to calculate the overall survival (OS) probability in patients with cervical cancer.

Methods: Data of 9876 female patients in SEER database and diagnosed as cervical cancer during 2010-2015, was retrospectively analyzed. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression model were applied to select predicted factors and a nomogram was developed to visualize the prediction model. The nomogram was compared with the FIGO stage prediction model. Harrell's C-index, receiver operating curve, calibration plot and decision curve analysis were used to assess the discrimination, accuracy, calibration and clinical utility of the prediction models.

Result: Eleven independent prognostic variables, including age at diagnosis, race, marital status at diagnosis, grade, histology, tumor size, FIGO stage, primary site surgery, regional lymph node surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy, were used to build the nomogram. The C-index of the nomogram was 0.826 (95% CI: 0.818 to 0.834), which was better than that of the FIGO stage prediction model (C-index: 0.785, 95% CI: 0.776 to 0.793). Calibration plot of the nomogram was well fitted in 3-year overall OS prediction, but overfitting in 5-year OS prediction. The net benefit of the nomogram was higher than the FIGO prediction model.

Conclusion: A clinical useful nomogram for calculating the overall survival probability in cervical cancer patients was developed. It performed better than the FIGO stage prediction model and could help clinicians to choose optimal treatments and precisely predict prognosis in clinical care and research.

Citing Articles

Construction and validation of prognostic models for young cervical cancer patients: age stratification based on restricted cubic splines.

Gong Y, Gou F, Qin Q, Tian W, Zhao W, Zi D Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):29808.

PMID: 39616230 PMC: 11608258. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-81644-z.


Development and validation of prognostic nomographs for patients with cervical cancer: SEER-based Asian population study.

Zeng S, Yang P, Xiao S, Liu L Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):7681.

PMID: 38561337 PMC: 10984919. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-57609-7.


CT-based radiomics nomogram for overall survival prediction in patients with cervical cancer treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy.

Xu C, Liu W, Zhao Q, Zhang L, Yin M, Zhou J Front Oncol. 2024; 13:1287121.

PMID: 38162501 PMC: 10755472. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1287121.


A novel nomogram and risk stratification for early metastasis in cervical cancer after radical radiotherapy.

Liu L, Lin J, Deng S, Yu H, Xie N, Sun Y Cancer Med. 2023; 12(24):21798-21806.

PMID: 37994611 PMC: 10757092. DOI: 10.1002/cam4.6745.


A prognostic model using FIGO 2018 staging and MRI-derived tumor volume to predict long-term outcomes in patients with uterine cervical squamous cell carcinoma who received definitive radiotherapy.

Zang L, Chen Q, Lin A, Chen J, Zhang X, Fang Y World J Surg Oncol. 2023; 21(1):210.

PMID: 37475053 PMC: 10360277. DOI: 10.1186/s12957-023-03116-4.


References
1.
Balachandran V, Gonen M, Smith J, DeMatteo R . Nomograms in oncology: more than meets the eye. Lancet Oncol. 2015; 16(4):e173-80. PMC: 4465353. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)71116-7. View

2.
Kong Y, Zong L, Yang J, Wu M, Xiang Y . Cervical cancer in women aged 25 years or younger: a retrospective study. Cancer Manag Res. 2019; 11:2051-2058. PMC: 6411317. DOI: 10.2147/CMAR.S195098. View

3.
El Ibrahimi S, Pinheiro P . The effect of marriage on stage at diagnosis and survival in women with cervical cancer. Psychooncology. 2016; 26(5):704-710. DOI: 10.1002/pon.4070. View

4.
Chandeying N, Hanprasertpong J . The prognostic impact of histological type on clinical outcomes of early-stage cervical cancer patients whom have been treated with radical surgery. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2017; 37(3):347-354. DOI: 10.1080/01443615.2016.1245279. View

5.
Vickers A, Van Calster B, Steyerberg E . Decision Curves, Calibration, and Subgroups. J Clin Oncol. 2017; 35(4):472-473. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2016.69.1576. View