Limits...
A new scoring system for predicting survival in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

Schild SE, Tan AD, Wampfler JA, Ross HJ, Yang P, Sloan JA - Cancer Med (2015)

Bottom Line: Prognostic factors that were significant on both UV and MV analyses were used to develop the score.The score for each prognostic factor ranged from 1 to 7 points with higher scores reflective of better survival.The bootstrap method confirmed the reliability of the score.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 5881 E. Mayo Blvd, Phoenix, Arizona, 85054.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Total score and the corresponding 5-year survival.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4567018&req=5

fig02: Total score and the corresponding 5-year survival.

Mentions: The score was calculated for each prognostic factor by dividing the 5-year survival rate in percent by 10. Individual score ranged from 1 to 7 points. High 5-year survival rates correlated to higher scores (Table4). The total scores were calculated for each patient based on the sum of the scores for each prognostic factor and ranged from 32 to 52 points. Kaplan–Meir survival estimates by total score are shown in Table5. Figure1 shows the median survival for each corresponding total score. Figure2 shows the total score and the corresponding 5-year survival rates. The 5-year OS by different total scores are categorized in Table6. Within category 4, patients with a low total score of 32 to 37 had a significantly worse OS (P < 0.0001, HR = 29.06 with a 95% CI 18.49–45.66) compared to patients with a high total score (50–52). All categorization schemes demonstrated successful prognostic power (Table6). Category 4 divided patients into groups with total scores of 32–37, 38–43, 44–47, 48–49, and 50–52 with 5-year OS rates of 8%, 20%, 48%, 72%, and 85%, respectively (P < 0.0001).


A new scoring system for predicting survival in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

Schild SE, Tan AD, Wampfler JA, Ross HJ, Yang P, Sloan JA - Cancer Med (2015)

Total score and the corresponding 5-year survival.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4567018&req=5

fig02: Total score and the corresponding 5-year survival.
Mentions: The score was calculated for each prognostic factor by dividing the 5-year survival rate in percent by 10. Individual score ranged from 1 to 7 points. High 5-year survival rates correlated to higher scores (Table4). The total scores were calculated for each patient based on the sum of the scores for each prognostic factor and ranged from 32 to 52 points. Kaplan–Meir survival estimates by total score are shown in Table5. Figure1 shows the median survival for each corresponding total score. Figure2 shows the total score and the corresponding 5-year survival rates. The 5-year OS by different total scores are categorized in Table6. Within category 4, patients with a low total score of 32 to 37 had a significantly worse OS (P < 0.0001, HR = 29.06 with a 95% CI 18.49–45.66) compared to patients with a high total score (50–52). All categorization schemes demonstrated successful prognostic power (Table6). Category 4 divided patients into groups with total scores of 32–37, 38–43, 44–47, 48–49, and 50–52 with 5-year OS rates of 8%, 20%, 48%, 72%, and 85%, respectively (P < 0.0001).

Bottom Line: Prognostic factors that were significant on both UV and MV analyses were used to develop the score.The score for each prognostic factor ranged from 1 to 7 points with higher scores reflective of better survival.The bootstrap method confirmed the reliability of the score.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, 5881 E. Mayo Blvd, Phoenix, Arizona, 85054.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus