ArticleCancer medicine2024
Comparison of the TNM9th and 8th editions for localized and locally advanced anal squamous cell carcinoma treated nonsurgically and proposal of a new stage grouping system.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the survival discrimination of the TNM9th and 8th editions for localized and locally advanced anal squamous cell carcinoma (ASCC) treated nonsurgically and suggest a simple revised staging system with data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database.
methodsOverall survival (OS) was the primary endpoint. Survival comparisons between the T and N stages and the different staging systems were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test, followed by correlation analysis and variable importance analysis (VIA). Additionally, multivariate analysis was employed to identify significant predictors, which were further visualized using a nomogram. Finally, calibration curve, C-index, and decision curve analysis (DCA) were applied to assess the performance of the different staging systems.
resultsA total of 5384 patients with ASCC were analyzed, revealing superior discrimination OS by the TNM9th edition compared to that by the TNM8th edition. Multivariate analysis identified the T and N stages as significant OS predictors (all p < 0.001). However, ambiguity persisted in stage III subgroups within the TNM9th edition, showing OS times of 102 months for stage IIIA disease, 88 months for stage IIIB disease, and 128 months for stage IIIC disease (all p > 0.05). Correlation analysis demonstrated an increased correlation for the T stage between the TNM8th and 9th editions (ρ value from 0.7 to 0.89), while the N stage correlation decreased (ρ value from 0.84 to 0.56). VIA and the prognostic nomogram highlighted the greater importance of the T stage over the N stage. Based on these findings, a new staging system was developed, and its clinical utility was confirmed through calibration curves, C-index values (from 0.598 to 0.604), and DCAs.
conclusionsOur new staging system exhibited slightly better prognostic value compared to the TNM9th staging systems for nonmetastatic ASCC and warrants further validation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.