Abstract:Background: The limitations of the traditional TNM system have spurred interest in multivariable models for personalized prognostication in laryngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers (LSCC/HPSCC). However, the performance of these models depends on the quality of data and modelling methodology, affecting their potential for clinical adoption. This systematic review and meta-analysis (SR-MA) evaluated clinical predictive models (CPMs) for recurrence and survival in treated LSCC/HPSCC. We assessed models' characteristics and methodologies, as well as performance, risk of bias (RoB), and applicability. Methods: Literature searches were conducted in MEDLINE (OVID), Embase (OVID) and IEEE databases from January 2005 to November 2023. The search algorithm used comprehensive text word and index term combinations without language or publication type restrictions. Independent reviewers screened titles and abstracts using a predefined Population, Index, Comparator, Outcomes, Timing and Setting (PICOTS) framework. We included externally validated (EV) multivariable models, with at least one clinical predictor, that provided recurrence or survival predictions. The SR-MA followed PRISMA reporting guidelines, and PROBAST framework for RoB assessment. Model discrimination was assessed using C-index/AUC, and was presented for all models using forest plots. MA was only performed for models that were externally validated in two or more cohorts, using random-effects model. The main outcomes were model discrimination and calibration measures for survival (OS) and/or local recurrence (LR) prediction. All measures and assessments were preplanned prior to data collection. Results: The SR-MA identified 11 models, reported in 16 studies. Seven models for OS showed good discrimination on development, with only one excelling (C-index >0.9), and three had weak or poor discrimination. Inclusion of a radiomics score as a model parameter achieved relatively better performance. Most models had poor generalisability, demonstrated by worse discrimination performance on EV, but they still outperformed the TNM system. Only two models met the criteria for MA, with pooled EV AUCs 0.73 (95% CI 0.71-0.76) and 0.67 (95% CI 0.6-0.74). RoB was high for all models, particularly in the analysis domain. Conclusions: This review highlighted the shortcomings of currently available models, while emphasizing the need for rigorous independent evaluations. Despite the proliferation of models, most exhibited methodological limitations and bias. Currently, no models can confidently be recommended for routine clinical use. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021248762, identifier CRD42021248762.

Declining Clinical Utility of Tools for Predicting Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Status: A Single Institution Experience from 2000 to 2021

A Clinical Decision Tool to Calculate Pretest Probability of Sentinel Lymph Node Metastasis in Primary Cutaneous Melanoma

Are Nomograms Useful for Predicting Sentinel Lymph Node Status in Melanoma Patients?

Sentinel lymph node biopsy is unreliable in predicting melanoma mortality for both younger and older patients

Sentinel lymph node positivity in melanoma: Which risk prediction tool is most accurate?

Complete lymph node dissection in cutaneous melanoma patients with positive sentinel lymph node: Outcome and predictors in a retrospective cohort study over 16 years

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Calculators for Informed Decision-Making

Sentinel lymph node risk prognostication in primary cutaneous melanoma through tissue-based profiling, potentially redefining the need for sentinel lymph node biopsy

The Utility of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Elderly Patients with Melanoma

The benefit of sentinel lymph node biopsy in elderly patients with melanoma: A retrospective analysis of SEER Medicare data (2010-2018)

Prognostic role of sentinel lymph node biopsy for patients with cutaneous melanoma: A retrospective study of surveillance, epidemiology, and end-result population-based data.

Prediction of Nonsentinel Lymph Node Metastasis in Acral Melanoma with Positive Sentinel Lymph Nodes.

Validation and Comparison of Models to Predict Non-Sentinel Lymph Node Metastasis in Breast Cancer Patients.

No winners: Performance of lung cancer prediction models depends on screening-detected, incidental, and biopsied pulmonary nodule use cases

False-negative sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma: a single-surgeon experience

Clinical predictive models for recurrence and survival in treated laryngeal and hypopharyngeal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Predicting non‐sentinel lymph node metastasis in Australian breast cancer patients: are the nomograms still useful in the post‐Z0011 era?

Development and External Validation of a Machine Learning Model for Prediction of Lymph Node Metastasis in Patients with Prostate Cancer

A new model to predict risk of nonsentinel lymph node status in Chinese sentinel lymph node-positive patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

A Prospective Validation Cohort Study of a Prediction Model on Non-Sentinel Lymph Node Involvement in Early Breast Cancer.

Validation of the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Nomogram for Predicting Non-Sentinel Lymph Node Metastasis in Sentinel Lymph Node-Positive Breast-Cancer Patients