ArticleTranslational cancer research2026
Prognostic nomograms for overall and cancer-specific survival in individuals with large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma: a population-based study.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) is a rare and aggressive subtype of pulmonary malignancy, for which prognostic assessment remains challenging due to limited predictive models. This study aimed to develop and validate prognostic nomograms for estimating overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) in individuals diagnosed with LCNEC. Methods: A total of 613 patients confirmed to have LCNEC between 2010 and 2015 were selected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. They were further divided into a training cohort and a validation cohort. The discrimination and calibration of the nomogram were evaluated using concordance index (C-index), area under time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curve [time-dependent area under the curve (AUC)], and calibration plots. The calibration curves were constructed to assess the consistency between predicted and observed outcomes. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was performed to evaluate the clinical utility of the nomograms across different probability threshold. Results: Six variables were selected to establish the nomogram for LCNEC. The C-index (0.732 for the validation cohort) and the time-dependent AUC (>0.7) indicated satisfactory discriminative ability of the nomogram. The calibration plots showed favorable consistency between the prediction of the nomogram and actual observations in both the training and validation cohorts. Furthermore, DCA showed that the nomogram was clinically useful to recognize patients at high risk. Conclusions: The prognostic nomograms developed in this study incorporate key clinical and pathological variables, including sex, radiotherapy, surgery, T stage, N stage, and brain metastasis status, to provide individualized estimates of OS and CSS in individuals with LCNEC. These models offer a practical tool for risk stratification and may support more personalized treatment planning in clinical practice.
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.