Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 25, Supplement 3, pp 916–917 | Cite as

ASO Author Reflections: Careful Development and Thoughtful Interpretation are Needed when Developing Online Prognostic Tools

  • Emily C. ZaborEmail author
ASO Author Reflections



The author has no conflicts of interest to disclose.


  1. 1.
    Soong SJ, Ding S, Coit D, et al. Predicting survival outcome of localized melanoma: an electronic prediction tool based on the AJCC Melanoma Database. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17(8):2006–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Callender GG, Gershenwald JE, Egger ME, et al. A novel and accurate computer model of melanoma prognosis for patients staged by sentinel lymph node biopsy: comparison with the American Joint Committee on Cancer model. J Am Coll Surg. 2012;214(4):608–617; discussion 617–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chen LL, Nolan ME, Silverstein MJ, et al. The impact of primary tumor size, lymph node status, and other prognostic factors on the risk of cancer death. Cancer. 2009;115(21):5071–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zabor EC, Coit D, Gershenwald JE, McMasters KM, Michaelson JS, Stromberg AJ, et al. Variability in predictions from online tools: a demonstration using internet-based melanoma predictors. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25(8):2172–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kattan MW, Hess KR, Amin MB, et al. American Joint Committee on Cancer acceptance criteria for inclusion of risk models for individualized prognosis in the practice of precision medicine. CA Cancer J Clin. 2016;66(5):370–4.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Epidemiology and BiostatisticsMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations