Stage-driven mortality and clinical risk stratification among lung cancer patients in Dhaka, Bangladesh: A multi-hospital secondary analysis

INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer is a major cause of cancer mortality, and patient-level outcome data from Bangladesh remain limited. Locally relevant, interpretable risk-stratification models may help identify patients with higher recorded mortality risk using routinely available clinical variables. This study evaluated mortality-associated factors and the hospital-wise internal-external validation performance of a clinical risk-stratification model among lung cancer patients in Dhaka, Bangladesh. METHODS: We performed a retrospective secondary analysis of a publicly available, de-identified multi-hospital dataset comprising 1,782 patients. The primary endpoint was recorded binary mortality status, defined from the source variable survived (No = mortality event; Yes = no recorded mortality event). Multivariable logistic regression was used for association analysis. A hospital-agnostic logistic prediction model was evaluated using leave-one-hospital-out internal-external validation. Discrimination was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), calibration by Brier score, calibration intercept and slope, and predicted-risk deciles, and potential clinical utility by decision curve analysis. RESULTS: Among 1,782 patients, 770 (43.2%) were recorded as survived = No. Recorded mortality increased across cancer stages: 16.3% in Stage I, 32.5% in Stage II, 55.6% in Stage III, and 79.2% in Stage IV. Compared with Stage I, adjusted odds ratios were 2.54 (95% CI 1.86 to 3.46) for Stage II, 6.66 (95% CI 4.86 to 9.14) for Stage III, and 20.77 (95% CI 14.46 to 29.83) for Stage IV. Surgery was associated with lower adjusted odds than chemotherapy (adjusted OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.89). Apparent AUROC was 0.769; pooled leave-one-hospital-out AUROC was 0.753 with a Brier score of 0.198. Pooled calibration yielded an intercept of -0.031 and slope of 0.911. At the evaluated 0.05 increments, the model had greater net benefit than treat-all and treat-none strategies from approximately 0.20 to 0.75. CONCLUSION: Recorded mortality in this multi-hospital Bangladeshi lung cancer dataset was strongly stage-driven. An interpretable logistic risk model showed moderate discrimination and reasonable calibration across hospital-wise internal-external validation. These findings support further evaluation of routinely available clinical risk stratification, but independent external and prospective validation are required before clinical implementation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLoS ONE
Published
2026-10-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0359406
Primary Topic
Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Stage-driven mortality and clinical risk stratification among lung cancer patients in Dhaka, Bangladesh: A multi-hospital secondary analysis

Sourov Das, Salma Jahan Tanny, Sushmita Kundu
PLoS ONE
Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
article

Stage-driven mortality and clinical risk stratification among lung cancer patients in Dhaka, Bangladesh: A multi-hospital secondary analysis

Sourov Das, Salma Jahan Tanny, Sushmita Kundu
article en

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer is a major cause of cancer mortality, and patient-level outcome data from Bangladesh remain limited. Locally relevant, interpretable risk-stratification models may help identify patients with higher recorded mortality risk using routinely available clinical variables. This study evaluated mortality-associated factors and the hospital-wise internal-external validation performance of a clinical risk-stratification model among lung cancer patients in Dhaka, Bangladesh. METHODS: We performed a retrospective secondary analysis of a publicly available, de-identified multi-hospital dataset comprising 1,782 patients. The primary endpoint was recorded binary mortality status, defined from the source variable survived (No = mortality event; Yes = no recorded mortality event). Multivariable logistic regression was used for association analysis. A hospital-agnostic logistic prediction model was evaluated using leave-one-hospital-out internal-external validation. Discrimination was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), calibration by Brier score, calibration intercept and slope, and predicted-risk deciles, and potential clinical utility by decision curve analysis. RESULTS: Among 1,782 patients, 770 (43.2%) were recorded as survived = No. Recorded mortality increased across cancer stages: 16.3% in Stage I, 32.5% in Stage II, 55.6% in Stage III, and 79.2% in Stage IV. Compared with Stage I, adjusted odds ratios were 2.54 (95% CI 1.86 to 3.46) for Stage II, 6.66 (95% CI 4.86 to 9.14) for Stage III, and 20.77 (95% CI 14.46 to 29.83) for Stage IV. Surgery was associated with lower adjusted odds than chemotherapy (adjusted OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.89). Apparent AUROC was 0.769; pooled leave-one-hospital-out AUROC was 0.753 with a Brier score of 0.198. Pooled calibration yielded an intercept of -0.031 and slope of 0.911. At the evaluated 0.05 increments, the model had greater net benefit than treat-all and treat-none strategies from approximately 0.20 to 0.75. CONCLUSION: Recorded mortality in this multi-hospital Bangladeshi lung cancer dataset was strongly stage-driven. An interpretable logistic risk model showed moderate discrimination and reasonable calibration across hospital-wise internal-external validation. These findings support further evaluation of routinely available clinical risk stratification, but independent external and prospective validation are required before clinical implementation.

PLoS ONEVol. 21(10)
Comilla Medical College (BD), Tbilisi State Medical University (GE)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.