Epidemiology and Prognostic Nomogram for Predicting Long-Term Disease-Specific Survival in Patients With Pancreatic Carcinoid Tumor
Résumé fourni par la source
OBJECTIVES: Pancreatic carcinoid tumor (PCT) is described as a malignant form of carcinoid tumors. However, the epidemiology and prognostic factors for PCT are poorly understood. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data of 2447 PCT patients were included in this study from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database and randomly divided into a training cohort (1959) and a validation cohort (488). The epidemiology of PCT was calculated, and independent prognostic factors were identified to construct a prognostic nomogram for predicting long-term disease-specific survival (DSS) among PCT patients. RESULTS: The incidence of PCT increased remarkably from 2000 to 2018. The 1-, 5-, and 10-year DSS rates were 96.4%, 90.3%, and 86.5%, respectively. Age at diagnosis, stage, surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy were identified as independent prognostic factors to construct a prognostic nomogram. The C -indices; area under the receiver operating characteristic curves for predicting 1-, 5-, and 10-year DSS, and calibration plots of the nomogram in both cohorts indicated a high discriminatory accuracy, preferable survival predictive ability, and optimal concordances, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of PCT has increased rapidly since 2000. In addition, we established a practical, effective, and accurate prognostic nomogram for predicting the long-term DSS of PCT patients.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Epidemiology and Prognostic Nomogram for Predicting Long-Term Disease-Specific Survival in Patients With Pancreatic Carcinoid Tumor
- Date Crossref
- 13/03/2024
- Éditeur
- Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.