4.1 Review

Nomograms are superior to staging and risk grouping systems for identifying high-risk patients: preoperative application in prostate cancer

期刊

CURRENT OPINION IN UROLOGY
卷 13, 期 2, 页码 111-116

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/00042307-200303000-00005

关键词

clinical design trial; prediction

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose of review We outline a generic approach to using a nomogram to predict a continuous probability of failure in high-risk patients (rather than putting patients into groups), in order to identify patients whose risk exceeds a cutoff point. We discuss the goals of any staging system, what markers should be included, and models of markers. Recent findings Selection of high-risk patients for any cancer has traditionally been accomplished by the creation of risk groups, or perhaps clinical stages. Ideally, high-risk patients should be identified as accurately as possible, because of the treatment and psychological implications for the patient. We argue that a continuous multivariable prediction model, such as a nomogram, is the most appropriate and accurate way to select high-risk patients. This type of model predicts outcome more accurately than risk grouping or staging systems. As an example, we use our preoperative prostatic specific antigen recurrence nomogram to identify patients at high risk of biochemical failure, who are in need of an effective neoadjuvant therapy. Summary It will follow from our discussion that identification of high-risk patients should follow four simple steps. First, select the endpoint of interest for the trial or the patient. Second, select the method that predicts the endpoint as accurately as possible. Third, determine the cutoff of predicted probability beyond which it makes sense to give the patient experimental therapy. Fourth, offer the novel therapy to the patient whose prediction of the endpoint, using the most accurate prediction method, exceeds the threshold.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据