Cargando…

S-GRAS score performs better than a model from SEER for patients with adrenocortical carcinoma

PURPOSE: To externally validate the performance of the S-GRAS score and a model from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database in a Chinese cohort of patients with adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC). METHODS: We first developed a model using data from the SEER database, after which...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lin, Wenhao, Dai, Jun, Xie, Jialing, Liu, Jiacheng, Sun, Fukang, Huang, Xin, He, Wei, Fang, Chen, Zhao, Juping, Xu, Danfeng
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Bioscientifica Ltd 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9254323/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35583177
http://dx.doi.org/10.1530/EC-22-0114
_version_ 1784740672251625472
author Lin, Wenhao
Dai, Jun
Xie, Jialing
Liu, Jiacheng
Sun, Fukang
Huang, Xin
He, Wei
Fang, Chen
Zhao, Juping
Xu, Danfeng
author_facet Lin, Wenhao
Dai, Jun
Xie, Jialing
Liu, Jiacheng
Sun, Fukang
Huang, Xin
He, Wei
Fang, Chen
Zhao, Juping
Xu, Danfeng
author_sort Lin, Wenhao
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To externally validate the performance of the S-GRAS score and a model from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database in a Chinese cohort of patients with adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC). METHODS: We first developed a model using data from the SEER database, after which we retrospectively reviewed 51 ACC patients hospitalized between 2013 and 2018, and we finally validated the model and S-GRAS score in this Chinese cohort. RESULTS: Patient age at diagnosis, tumor size, TNM stage, and radiotherapy were used to construct the model, and the Harrell’s C-index of the model in the training set was 0.725 (95% CI: 0.682–0.768). However, the 5-year area under the curve (AUC) of the model in the validation cohort was 0.598 (95% CI: 0.487–0.708). The 5-year AUC of the ENSAT stage was 0.640 (95% CI: 0.543–0.737), but the Kaplan–Meier curves of stages I and II overlapped in the validation cohort. The resection status (P = 0.066), age (P=0.68), Ki67 (P = 0.69), and symptoms (P = 0.66) did not have a significant impact on cancer-specific survival in the validation cohort. In contrast, the S-GRAS score group showed better discrimination (5-year AUC: 0.683, 95% CI: 0.602–0.764) than the SEER model or the ENSAT stage. CONCLUSION: The SEER model showed favorable discrimination and calibration ability in the training set, but it failed to distinguish patients with various prognoses in our institution. In contrast, the S-GRAS score could effectively stratify patients with different outcomes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9254323
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Bioscientifica Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-92543232022-07-05 S-GRAS score performs better than a model from SEER for patients with adrenocortical carcinoma Lin, Wenhao Dai, Jun Xie, Jialing Liu, Jiacheng Sun, Fukang Huang, Xin He, Wei Fang, Chen Zhao, Juping Xu, Danfeng Endocr Connect Research PURPOSE: To externally validate the performance of the S-GRAS score and a model from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database in a Chinese cohort of patients with adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC). METHODS: We first developed a model using data from the SEER database, after which we retrospectively reviewed 51 ACC patients hospitalized between 2013 and 2018, and we finally validated the model and S-GRAS score in this Chinese cohort. RESULTS: Patient age at diagnosis, tumor size, TNM stage, and radiotherapy were used to construct the model, and the Harrell’s C-index of the model in the training set was 0.725 (95% CI: 0.682–0.768). However, the 5-year area under the curve (AUC) of the model in the validation cohort was 0.598 (95% CI: 0.487–0.708). The 5-year AUC of the ENSAT stage was 0.640 (95% CI: 0.543–0.737), but the Kaplan–Meier curves of stages I and II overlapped in the validation cohort. The resection status (P = 0.066), age (P=0.68), Ki67 (P = 0.69), and symptoms (P = 0.66) did not have a significant impact on cancer-specific survival in the validation cohort. In contrast, the S-GRAS score group showed better discrimination (5-year AUC: 0.683, 95% CI: 0.602–0.764) than the SEER model or the ENSAT stage. CONCLUSION: The SEER model showed favorable discrimination and calibration ability in the training set, but it failed to distinguish patients with various prognoses in our institution. In contrast, the S-GRAS score could effectively stratify patients with different outcomes. Bioscientifica Ltd 2022-05-18 /pmc/articles/PMC9254323/ /pubmed/35583177 http://dx.doi.org/10.1530/EC-22-0114 Text en © The authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)
spellingShingle Research
Lin, Wenhao
Dai, Jun
Xie, Jialing
Liu, Jiacheng
Sun, Fukang
Huang, Xin
He, Wei
Fang, Chen
Zhao, Juping
Xu, Danfeng
S-GRAS score performs better than a model from SEER for patients with adrenocortical carcinoma
title S-GRAS score performs better than a model from SEER for patients with adrenocortical carcinoma
title_full S-GRAS score performs better than a model from SEER for patients with adrenocortical carcinoma
title_fullStr S-GRAS score performs better than a model from SEER for patients with adrenocortical carcinoma
title_full_unstemmed S-GRAS score performs better than a model from SEER for patients with adrenocortical carcinoma
title_short S-GRAS score performs better than a model from SEER for patients with adrenocortical carcinoma
title_sort s-gras score performs better than a model from seer for patients with adrenocortical carcinoma
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9254323/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35583177
http://dx.doi.org/10.1530/EC-22-0114
work_keys_str_mv AT linwenhao sgrasscoreperformsbetterthanamodelfromseerforpatientswithadrenocorticalcarcinoma
AT daijun sgrasscoreperformsbetterthanamodelfromseerforpatientswithadrenocorticalcarcinoma
AT xiejialing sgrasscoreperformsbetterthanamodelfromseerforpatientswithadrenocorticalcarcinoma
AT liujiacheng sgrasscoreperformsbetterthanamodelfromseerforpatientswithadrenocorticalcarcinoma
AT sunfukang sgrasscoreperformsbetterthanamodelfromseerforpatientswithadrenocorticalcarcinoma
AT huangxin sgrasscoreperformsbetterthanamodelfromseerforpatientswithadrenocorticalcarcinoma
AT hewei sgrasscoreperformsbetterthanamodelfromseerforpatientswithadrenocorticalcarcinoma
AT fangchen sgrasscoreperformsbetterthanamodelfromseerforpatientswithadrenocorticalcarcinoma
AT zhaojuping sgrasscoreperformsbetterthanamodelfromseerforpatientswithadrenocorticalcarcinoma
AT xudanfeng sgrasscoreperformsbetterthanamodelfromseerforpatientswithadrenocorticalcarcinoma