MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991337672 · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2019.11.008

Development and external validation of a dynamic prognostic nomogram for primary extremity soft tissue sarcoma survivors

2019· article· en· W2991337672 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dario Callegaro, Rosalba Miceli, Sylvie Bonvalot, Peter C. Ferguson, D. Strauß, Veroniek M. van Praag, Antonin Lévy, Anthony M. Griffin, Andrew J. Hayes, Silvia Stacchiotti, C. Le Péchoux, Myles Smith, Marco Fiore, Angelo Paolo Dei Tos, Henry Smith, Charles Catton, Joanna Szkandera, Andreas Leithner, Michiel A. J. van de Sande, Paolo G. Casali, Jay S. Wunder, Alessandro Gronchi

Bibliographic record

VenueEClinicalMedicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
FundersUniversitair Medisch Centrum GroningenRadboud Universiteit
KeywordsNomogramMedicineSoft tissue sarcomaProportional hazards modelClinical endpointSarcomaPrognostic variableCohortSoft tissuePrimary tumorMetastasisOncologySurgeryInternal medicineCancerClinical trialPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Prognostic nomograms for patients with extremity soft tissue sarcoma (eSTS) typically predict survival or the occurrence of local recurrence or distant metastasis at time of surgery. Our aim was to develop and externally validate a dynamic prognostic nomogram for overall survival in eSTS survivors for use during follow-up. METHODS: All primary eSTS patients operated with curative intent between 1994 and 2013 at three European and one Canadian sarcoma centers formed the development cohort. Patients with Fédération Française des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer (FNCLCC) grade II and grade III eSTS operated between 2000 and 2016 at seven other European reference centers formed the external validation cohort. We used a landmark analysis approach and a multivariable Cox model to create a dynamic nomogram; the prediction window was fixed at five years. A backward procedure based on the Akaike Information Criterion was adopted for variable selection. We tested the nomogram performance in terms of calibration and discrimination. FINDINGS: The development and validation cohorts included 3740 and 893 patients, respectively. The variables selected applying the backward procedure were patient's age, tumor size and its interaction with landmark time, tumor FNCLCC grade and its interaction with landmark time, histology, and both local recurrence and distant metastasis (as first event) indicator variables. The nomogram showed good calibration and discrimination. Harrell C indexes at different landmark times were between 0.776 (0.761-0.790) and 0.845 (0.823-0.862) in the development series and between 0.675 (0.643-0.704) and 0.810 (0.775-0.844) in the validation series. INTERPRETATION: A new dynamic nomogram is available to predict 5-year overall survival at different times during the first three years of follow-up in patients operated for primary eSTS. This nomogram allows physicians to update the individual survival prediction during follow-up on the basis of baseline variables, time elapsed from surgery and first-event history.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations76
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEClinicalMedicineSame topicSarcoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207