PREDICT-GTN 2: Two-factor streamlined models match FIGO performance in gestational trophoblastic neoplasia

被引:3
|
作者
Parker, Victoria L. [1 ]
Winter, Matthew C. [1 ,2 ]
Tidy, John A. [2 ]
Palmer, Julia E. [2 ]
Sarwar, Naveed [3 ]
Singh, Kamaljit [2 ]
Aguiar, Xianne [3 ]
Hancock, Barry W. [1 ]
Pacey, Allan A. [4 ]
Seckl, Michael J. [3 ]
Harrison, Robert F. [5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sheffield, Sch Med & Populat Hlth, Div Clin Med, Level 4 Jessop Wing,Tree Root Walk, Sheffield S10 2SF, England
[2] Sheffield Teaching Hosp NHS Fdn Trust, Sheffield Ctr Trophoblast Dis, Weston Pk Canc Ctr, Whitham Rd, Sheffield S10 2SJ, England
[3] Chańng Cross Hosp, Gestat Trophoblast Dis Ctr, Dept Med Oncol, Fulham Palace Rd, London W6 8RF, England
[4] Univ Manchester, Fac Biol Med & Hlth, Core Technol Facil, 46 Grafton St, Manchester M13 9NT, England
[5] Univ Sheffield, Dept Automat Control & Syst Engn, Mappin St, Sheffield S1 3JD, England
关键词
Gestational trophoblastic disease; Gestational trophoblastic neoplasia; FIGO; Streamline; Refine; Two-factor model; DIAGNOSIS; GUIDELINES; ONCOLOGY; SYSTEMS; DISEASE;
D O I
10.1016/j.ygyno.2023.11.017
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Objective. The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) scoring system uses the sum of eight risk-factors to predict single-agent chemotherapy resistance in Gestational Trophoblastic Neoplasia (GTN). To improve ease of use, this study aimed to generate: (i) streamlined models that match FIGO performance and; (ii) visual-decision aids (nomograms) for guiding management.Methods. Using training (n = 4191) and validation datasets (n = 144) of GTN patients from two UK specialist centres, logistic regression analysis generated two-factor models for cross-validation and exploration. Performance was assessed using true and false positive rate, positive and negative predictive values, Bland-Altman calibration plots, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, decision-curve analysis (DCA) and contingency tables. Nomograms were developed from estimated model parameters and performance cross-checked upon the training and validation dataset.Results. Three streamlined, two-factor models were selected for analysis: (i) M1, pre-treatment hCG + history of failed chemotherapy; (ii) M2, pre-treatment hCG + site of metastases and; (iii) M3, pre-treatment hCG + number of metastases. Using both training and validation datasets, these models showed no evidence of significant discordance from FIGO (McNemar's test p > 0.78) or across a range of performance parameters. This behaviour was maintained when applying algorithms simulating the logic of the nomograms. Conclusions. Our streamlined models could be used to assess GTN patients and replace FIGO, statistically matching performance. Given the importance of imaging parameters in guiding treatment, M2 and M3 are favoured for ongoing validation. In resource-poor countries, where access to specialist centres is problematic, M1 could be pragmatically implemented. Further prospective validation on a larger cohort is recommended.(c) 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
引用
收藏
页码:152 / 159
页数:8
相关论文
共 2 条
  • [1] PREDICT-GTN 1: Can we improve the FIGO scoring system in gestational trophoblastic neoplasia?
    Parker, Victoria L.
    Winter, Matthew C.
    Tidy, John A.
    Hancock, Barry W.
    Palmer, Julia E.
    Sarwar, Naveed
    Kaur, Baljeet
    McDonald, Katie
    Aguiar, Xianne
    Singh, Kamaljit
    Unsworth, Nick
    Jabbar, Imran
    Pacey, Allan A.
    Harrison, Robert F.
    Seckl, Michael J.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2023, 152 (05) : 986 - 997
  • [2] Combining serum peptide signatures with International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) risk score to predict the outcomes of patients with gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (GTN) after first-line chemotherapy
    Wang, Fei
    Wang, Zi-ran
    Ding, Xue-song
    Yang, Hua
    Guo, Ye
    Su, Hao
    Wan, Xi-run
    Wang, Li-juan
    Jiang, Xiang-yang
    Xu, Yan-hua
    Chen, Feng
    Cui, Wei
    Feng, Feng-zhi
    FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY, 2022, 12