ArticleTranslational cancer research2025
Prediction of the prognosis of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma patients after hepatectomy via propensity score matching: a competitive risk model analysis.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper 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
Background: Hepatectomy represents the cornerstone therapeutic approach for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICCA); however, research pertaining to the prognosis of ICCA patients utilizing competing risk models remains scarce. This study aimed to construct a prognostic model utilizing competing risk analysis to predict cancer-specific survival (CSS) among ICCA patients posthepatectomy. Methods: This study retrospectively analyzed ICCA patients from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (2004-2015) who underwent hepatectomy. Patients were randomly allocated to the training (70%) and validation (30%) cohorts, with baselines balanced via propensity score matching (PSM). Prognostic factors were ascertained through both univariate and multivariate analyses of competing risks, facilitating the development of pertinent risk models and nomograms. The efficacy of the model was assessed via receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, area under the curve (AUC), and calibration plots, with clinical utility appraised through decision curve analysis (DCA). The X-tile program facilitated the categorization of participants into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups on the basis of their scores derived from the nomogram. Results: Among the 1,131 participants included in the analysis after PSM, 65.34% (n=739) died from ICCA, and 13.97% (n=158) died from other causes. The 1-, 2-, and 3-year overall survival (OS) rates for ICCA patients after hepatectomy were 79.4%, 59.8% and 46.4%, respectively; the corresponding CSS rates were 82.5%, 64.0%, and 51.3%, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that hypodifferentiation, advanced T stage, lymph node invasion, and distant metastasis were significant risk factors. The AUCs for predicting CSS in the training cohort were 0.668, 0.711, and 0.710 for 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively. similarly, the AUCs for the test cohort were 0.709, 0.718, and 0.721 for 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively. The AUC demonstrated that the developed nomogram model exhibited moderate discriminatory power. The calibration curve demonstrated that the predicted values closely matched the actual data. DCA demonstrated greater clinical utility for the nomogram than the tumor node metastasis (TNM) classification system. Patients were divided into three risk groups according to the nomogram, which revealed substantial differences in survival rates between the groups (P<0.001). Conclusions: The prognostic nomogram developed based on the competitive risk model demonstrates moderate predictive accuracy for the specific survival rate of ICCA patients after hepatectomy, offering a practical tool for individualized prognostication and treatment planning.
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.