Cargando…

Survival of patients with nonseminomatous germ cell cancer: a review of the IGCC classification by Cox regression and recursive partitioning

The International Germ Cell Consensus (IGCC) classification identifies good, intermediate and poor prognosis groups among patients with metastatic nonseminomatous germ cell tumours (NSGCT). It uses the risk factors primary site, presence of nonpulmonary visceral metastases and tumour markers alpha-f...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van Dijk, M R, Steyerberg, E W, Stenning, S P, Dusseldorp, E, Habbema, J D F
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group 2004
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2409665/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15026798
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6601665
_version_ 1782155827343261696
author van Dijk, M R
Steyerberg, E W
Stenning, S P
Dusseldorp, E
Habbema, J D F
author_facet van Dijk, M R
Steyerberg, E W
Stenning, S P
Dusseldorp, E
Habbema, J D F
author_sort van Dijk, M R
collection PubMed
description The International Germ Cell Consensus (IGCC) classification identifies good, intermediate and poor prognosis groups among patients with metastatic nonseminomatous germ cell tumours (NSGCT). It uses the risk factors primary site, presence of nonpulmonary visceral metastases and tumour markers alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) and lactic dehydrogenase (LDH). The IGCC classification is easy to use and remember, but lacks flexibility. We aimed to examine the extent of any loss in discrimination within the IGCC classification in comparison with alternative modelling by formal weighing of the risk factors. We analysed survival of 3048 NSGCT patients with Cox regression and recursive partitioning for alternative classifications. Good, intermediate and poor prognosis groups were based on predicted 5-year survival. Classifications were further refined by subgrouping within the poor prognosis group. Performance was measured primarily by a bootstrap corrected c-statistic to indicate discriminative ability for future patients. The weights of the risk factors in the alternative classifications differed slightly from the implicit weights in the IGCC classification. Discriminative ability, however, did not increase clearly (IGCC classification, c=0.732; Cox classification, c=0.730; Recursive partitioning classification, c=0.709). Three subgroups could be identified within the poor prognosis groups, resulting in classifications with five prognostic groups and slightly better discriminative ability (c=0.740). In conclusion, the IGCC classification in three prognostic groups is largely supported by Cox regression and recursive partitioning. Cox regression was the most promising tool to define a more refined classification.
format Text
id pubmed-2409665
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2004
publisher Nature Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-24096652009-09-10 Survival of patients with nonseminomatous germ cell cancer: a review of the IGCC classification by Cox regression and recursive partitioning van Dijk, M R Steyerberg, E W Stenning, S P Dusseldorp, E Habbema, J D F Br J Cancer Clinical The International Germ Cell Consensus (IGCC) classification identifies good, intermediate and poor prognosis groups among patients with metastatic nonseminomatous germ cell tumours (NSGCT). It uses the risk factors primary site, presence of nonpulmonary visceral metastases and tumour markers alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) and lactic dehydrogenase (LDH). The IGCC classification is easy to use and remember, but lacks flexibility. We aimed to examine the extent of any loss in discrimination within the IGCC classification in comparison with alternative modelling by formal weighing of the risk factors. We analysed survival of 3048 NSGCT patients with Cox regression and recursive partitioning for alternative classifications. Good, intermediate and poor prognosis groups were based on predicted 5-year survival. Classifications were further refined by subgrouping within the poor prognosis group. Performance was measured primarily by a bootstrap corrected c-statistic to indicate discriminative ability for future patients. The weights of the risk factors in the alternative classifications differed slightly from the implicit weights in the IGCC classification. Discriminative ability, however, did not increase clearly (IGCC classification, c=0.732; Cox classification, c=0.730; Recursive partitioning classification, c=0.709). Three subgroups could be identified within the poor prognosis groups, resulting in classifications with five prognostic groups and slightly better discriminative ability (c=0.740). In conclusion, the IGCC classification in three prognostic groups is largely supported by Cox regression and recursive partitioning. Cox regression was the most promising tool to define a more refined classification. Nature Publishing Group 2004-03-22 2004-02-24 /pmc/articles/PMC2409665/ /pubmed/15026798 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6601665 Text en Copyright © 2004 Cancer Research UK https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material.If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Clinical
van Dijk, M R
Steyerberg, E W
Stenning, S P
Dusseldorp, E
Habbema, J D F
Survival of patients with nonseminomatous germ cell cancer: a review of the IGCC classification by Cox regression and recursive partitioning
title Survival of patients with nonseminomatous germ cell cancer: a review of the IGCC classification by Cox regression and recursive partitioning
title_full Survival of patients with nonseminomatous germ cell cancer: a review of the IGCC classification by Cox regression and recursive partitioning
title_fullStr Survival of patients with nonseminomatous germ cell cancer: a review of the IGCC classification by Cox regression and recursive partitioning
title_full_unstemmed Survival of patients with nonseminomatous germ cell cancer: a review of the IGCC classification by Cox regression and recursive partitioning
title_short Survival of patients with nonseminomatous germ cell cancer: a review of the IGCC classification by Cox regression and recursive partitioning
title_sort survival of patients with nonseminomatous germ cell cancer: a review of the igcc classification by cox regression and recursive partitioning
topic Clinical
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2409665/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15026798
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6601665
work_keys_str_mv AT vandijkmr survivalofpatientswithnonseminomatousgermcellcancerareviewoftheigccclassificationbycoxregressionandrecursivepartitioning
AT steyerbergew survivalofpatientswithnonseminomatousgermcellcancerareviewoftheigccclassificationbycoxregressionandrecursivepartitioning
AT stenningsp survivalofpatientswithnonseminomatousgermcellcancerareviewoftheigccclassificationbycoxregressionandrecursivepartitioning
AT dusseldorpe survivalofpatientswithnonseminomatousgermcellcancerareviewoftheigccclassificationbycoxregressionandrecursivepartitioning
AT habbemajdf survivalofpatientswithnonseminomatousgermcellcancerareviewoftheigccclassificationbycoxregressionandrecursivepartitioning