Risk models for recurrence and survival after kidney cancer: a systematic review

医学 统计的 判别式 肿瘤科 内科学 逻辑回归 肾细胞癌 阶段(地层学) 荟萃分析 统计 外科 人工智能 数学 计算机科学 生物 古生物学
作者
Juliet A. Usher‐Smith,Lanxin Li,Lydia Roberts,Hannah Harrison,Sabrina H. Rossi,Stephen J. Sharp,Carol Coupland,Julia Hippisley‐Cox,Simon J. Griffin,Tobias Klatte,Grant D. Stewart
出处
期刊:BJUI [Wiley]
卷期号:130 (5): 562-579 被引量:10
标识
DOI:10.1111/bju.15673
摘要

Objective To systematically identify and compare the performance of prognostic models providing estimates of survival or recurrence of localized renal cell cancer (RCC) in patients treated with surgery with curative intent. Materials and Methods We performed a systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42019162349). We searched Medline, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library from 1 January 2000 to 12 December 2019 to identify studies reporting the performance of one or more prognostic model(s) that predict recurrence‐free survival (RFS), cancer‐specific survival (CSS) or overall survival (OS) in patients who have undergone surgical resection for localized RCC. For each outcome we summarized the discrimination of each model using the C ‐statistic and performed multivariate random‐effects meta‐analysis of the logit transformed C ‐statistic to rank the models. Results Of a total of 13 549 articles, 57 included data on the performance of 22 models in external populations. C ‐statistics ranged from 0.59 to 0.90. Several risk models were assessed in two or more external populations and had similarly high discriminative performance. For RFS, these were the Sorbellini, Karakiewicz, Leibovich and Kattan models, with the UCLA Integrated Staging System model also having similar performance in European/US populations. All had C ‐statistics ≥0.75 in at least half of the validations. For CSS, they the models with the highest discriminative performance in two or more external validation studies were the Zisman, Stage, Size, Grade and Necrosis (SSIGN), Karakiewicz, Leibovich and Sorbellini models ( C ‐statistic ≥0.80 in at least half of the validations), and for OS they were the Leibovich, Karakiewicz, Sorbellini and SSIGN models. For all outcomes, the models based on clinical features at presentation alone (Cindolo and Yaycioglu) had consistently lower discrimination. Estimates of model calibration were only infrequently included but most underestimated survival. Conclusion Several models had good discriminative ability, with there being no single ‘best’ model. The choice from these models for each setting should be informed by both the comparative performance and availability of factors included in the models. All would need recalibration if used to provide absolute survival estimates.
最长约 10秒,即可获得该文献文件

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
汤绮菱完成签到,获得积分10
刚刚
1秒前
英姑应助ding采纳,获得10
1秒前
dd完成签到,获得积分10
3秒前
领导范儿应助niekyang采纳,获得10
3秒前
Fashioner8351完成签到,获得积分10
3秒前
Leslie完成签到 ,获得积分10
3秒前
Zo完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
闪闪的夏之完成签到,获得积分10
6秒前
小初发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
知非完成签到 ,获得积分10
7秒前
漫漫楚威风完成签到,获得积分10
9秒前
英俊的铭应助暮晓见采纳,获得10
9秒前
科研通AI2S应助luckweb采纳,获得10
10秒前
flymove完成签到,获得积分10
11秒前
威武的初兰完成签到 ,获得积分10
11秒前
英俊的铭应助枫叶的脚步采纳,获得10
12秒前
陈昇发布了新的文献求助30
12秒前
思睿拜完成签到 ,获得积分10
13秒前
15秒前
斯文败类应助小初采纳,获得10
16秒前
lhlgood完成签到,获得积分10
17秒前
齐天完成签到 ,获得积分10
20秒前
21秒前
暮晓见发布了新的文献求助10
22秒前
RayLam完成签到,获得积分10
23秒前
园艺小学生完成签到,获得积分10
24秒前
共享精神应助栗子味采纳,获得10
25秒前
小初完成签到,获得积分20
25秒前
musei发布了新的文献求助10
27秒前
Hello应助牧谷采纳,获得10
28秒前
28秒前
30秒前
小猪猪饲养员完成签到,获得积分10
32秒前
33秒前
33秒前
lxlcx完成签到,获得积分10
33秒前
cc完成签到 ,获得积分10
34秒前
科研通AI5应助youyouG采纳,获得30
35秒前
小星星完成签到,获得积分10
36秒前
高分求助中
Continuum Thermodynamics and Material Modelling 3000
Production Logging: Theoretical and Interpretive Elements 2700
Les Mantodea de Guyane Insecta, Polyneoptera 1000
Structural Load Modelling and Combination for Performance and Safety Evaluation 1000
Conference Record, IAS Annual Meeting 1977 820
電気学会論文誌D(産業応用部門誌), 141 巻, 11 号 510
Typology of Conditional Constructions 500
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 生物 医学 工程类 有机化学 生物化学 物理 纳米技术 计算机科学 内科学 化学工程 复合材料 基因 遗传学 物理化学 催化作用 量子力学 光电子学 冶金
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 3571455
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 3142008
关于积分的说明 9445318
捐赠科研通 2843544
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 1562861
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 731368
科研通“疑难数据库(出版商)”最低求助积分说明 718541