Prognostic factors in non-small cell lung cancer: a decade of progress.

608 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

REporting recommendations for tumour MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK) (2005, background): “Such reporting deficiencies are increasingly being highlighted by systematic reviews of the published literature on particular markers or cancers [19–25].”
Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies. (2005, background): “Such reporting deficiencies are increasingly being highlighted by systematic reviews of the published literature on particular markers or cancers.(19-25) The development of REMARK guidelines was a major recommendation of the NCI-EORTC First International Meeting on Cancer Diagnostics (From Discovery”
Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies (REMARK): Explanation and Elaboration (2012, background): “Several studies have noted the generally small sample size of published studies of prognostic markers. In a review of lung cancer prognostic marker studies, the median number of patients per study was 120”
Developing and Validating a Survival Prediction Model for NSCLC Patients Through Distributed Learning Across 3 Countries (2017, unknown): “Other prognostic factors have been identified, such as performance status (13–15), weight loss (13, 14), presence of comorbidity (15), chemotherapy use in combination with RT (13, 16), radiation dose (13, 17), tumor size (12, 18–21), and image features, the so-called radiomics approach (22–26).”