Table 2 Comparison of traditional and nomogram models for hCCA.
Year | Method | Objective | Span (years) | Sample size | Sample source | Variables included in nomogram/model | C- index (training /testing set) | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2016 | Cox regression analysis | OS | 9 | 235 | Single center | Age, preoperative CA19-9 levels, portal vein involvement, hepatic artery invasion, lymph node metastases and surgical treatment outcomes (R0 or R1/2) | 0.680 and 0.650 | |
2021 | Cox regression analysis | OS | 5 | 319 and 109 | SEER database and single center | Age, T stage, tumor size and LODDS | 0.695 and 0.688 | |
2021 | Cox regression analysis | OS | 12 | 1173 | SEER database | Age, T stage, radiation, chemotherapy, tumor size and LODDS | 0.665 and 0.650 | |
2022 | Cox regression analysis | OS | 15 | 806 | SEER database | Age, tumor size, tumor grade, lymph node ratio and T stage parameters | 0.655 and 0.626 | |
– | – | OS | 11 | 340 | Our study | The TNM staging system | 0.621 and 0.612 | – |
– | – | OS | 11 | 340 | Our study | The Bismuth–Corlette classification | 0.531 and 0.487 | – |
2024 | ML | OS | 11 | 340 | Our study | positive margin, N stage, TLNC and tumor differentiation | 0.731 and 0.714 | – |
