Development and validation of a clinical cure marker based on negative lymph nodes for gastric cancer after gastrectomy.
Frontiers in Surgery 2023
OBJECTIVE: To explore lymph node (LN)-related derived indicators as clinical cure markers for gastric cancer (GC) after gastrectomy.
METHODS: Data of resected GC patients were extracted from the SEER database and our own department. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the baseline differences between the clinical cure and the nonclinical cure groups. The area under the curve (AUC) and decision curve analysis (DCA) were used to choose the optimal marker, and survival analysis was used to validate the clinical value of the most effective marker.
RESULTS: After PSM, the differences in age, sex, race, location, surgical type, and histologic type between the two groups were significantly reduced (all P > 0.05), and the AUCs of examined LNs (ELNs), negative LNs (NLNs), ESR (ELNs/tumor size), ETR (ELNs/T-stage), NSR (NLNs/tumor size), NTR (NLNs/T-stage), EPR (ELNs/PLNs) and NPR (NLNs/PLNs) were 0.522, 0.625, 0.622, 0.692, 0.706, 0.751, 7.43, and 7.50, respectively. When NTR was 5.9, the Youden index of 0.378 was the highest. The sensitivity and specificity were 67.5% and 70.3% in the training group and 66.79% and 67.8% in the validation group, respectively. DCA showed that NTR had the largest net clinical benefit, and patients with NTR greater than 5.9 had significantly prolonged overall survival in our own cohort.
CONCLUSION: NLNs, NTR, NSR, ESR, ETR, NPR and EPR can be used as clinical cure markers. However, NTR was the most effective, and the best cutoff value was 5.9.
METHODS: Data of resected GC patients were extracted from the SEER database and our own department. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the baseline differences between the clinical cure and the nonclinical cure groups. The area under the curve (AUC) and decision curve analysis (DCA) were used to choose the optimal marker, and survival analysis was used to validate the clinical value of the most effective marker.
RESULTS: After PSM, the differences in age, sex, race, location, surgical type, and histologic type between the two groups were significantly reduced (all P > 0.05), and the AUCs of examined LNs (ELNs), negative LNs (NLNs), ESR (ELNs/tumor size), ETR (ELNs/T-stage), NSR (NLNs/tumor size), NTR (NLNs/T-stage), EPR (ELNs/PLNs) and NPR (NLNs/PLNs) were 0.522, 0.625, 0.622, 0.692, 0.706, 0.751, 7.43, and 7.50, respectively. When NTR was 5.9, the Youden index of 0.378 was the highest. The sensitivity and specificity were 67.5% and 70.3% in the training group and 66.79% and 67.8% in the validation group, respectively. DCA showed that NTR had the largest net clinical benefit, and patients with NTR greater than 5.9 had significantly prolonged overall survival in our own cohort.
CONCLUSION: NLNs, NTR, NSR, ESR, ETR, NPR and EPR can be used as clinical cure markers. However, NTR was the most effective, and the best cutoff value was 5.9.
Full text links
Trending Papers
The pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of sepsis-associated disseminated intravascular coagulation.Journal of Intensive Care 2023 May 24
Abdominal wall closure.British Journal of Surgery 2023 September 16
Diagnosis and management of prolactin-secreting pituitary adenomas: a Pituitary Society international Consensus Statement.Nature Reviews. Endocrinology 2023 September 6
MRI abnormalities in Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and other rapidly progressive dementia.Journal of Neurology 2023 September 13
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app