European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2023
Comparison of prognostic and treatment between T1a and T1b glottic cancer: a propensity score-matched SEER database analysis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Fang Lucheng, Tuohuti Aikebaier, Shi Licai, Chen Xiong
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The prognoses of T1a and T1b glottic cancers are still controversial. This study aimed to compare the prognosis difference between the two groups based on the population-based Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (SEER).
METHODS: Data for patients with T1a or T1b glottic cancers were extracted from the SEER database. The bias between T1a and T1b glottic cancers was minimized with Propensity Score Matching (PSM), and disease-specific survival (DSS) was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, and Cox proportional hazards models.
RESULTS: A total of 5,272 patients were extracted from the database, including 847 patients with T1b glottic cancer that were 1:1 propensity score-matched with patients with T1a glottic cancer. After propensity score-matching, there was no statistical difference in disease-specific survival between T1a and T1b patients, whilst survival was impaired by old age. However, on the multivariate analysis, the T1a stage was associated with improved DSS compared with the T1b stage.
CONCLUSION: Our analysis showed that T1a glottic cancers didn't have a significantly better prognosis compared with T1b after PSM. However, the DSS of T1a patients is superior to that of T1b patients in multivariate analysis.
METHODS: Data for patients with T1a or T1b glottic cancers were extracted from the SEER database. The bias between T1a and T1b glottic cancers was minimized with Propensity Score Matching (PSM), and disease-specific survival (DSS) was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method, log-rank test, and Cox proportional hazards models.
RESULTS: A total of 5,272 patients were extracted from the database, including 847 patients with T1b glottic cancer that were 1:1 propensity score-matched with patients with T1a glottic cancer. After propensity score-matching, there was no statistical difference in disease-specific survival between T1a and T1b patients, whilst survival was impaired by old age. However, on the multivariate analysis, the T1a stage was associated with improved DSS compared with the T1b stage.
CONCLUSION: Our analysis showed that T1a glottic cancers didn't have a significantly better prognosis compared with T1b after PSM. However, the DSS of T1a patients is superior to that of T1b patients in multivariate analysis.