ArticleCancer2010
Prognostic significance of grading in lung adenocarcinoma.
Article in Cancer, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
63 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Natural Growth of Subsolid Nodules Predicted by Quantitative Initial CT Features: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in oncology · 2020Pooled it
- The value of non-enhanced CT 3D visualization in differentiating stage Ⅰ invasive lung adenocarcinoma between LPA and non-LPA.European journal of radiology open · 2024Article
- Proposed novel grading system for stage I invasive lung adenocarcinoma and a comparison with the 2020 IASLC grading system.Thoracic cancer · 2024Article
- The differential diagnosis of lung precursor glandular lesions, micro-invasive adenocarcinoma, and invasive adenocarcinoma using low dose spectral computed tomography perfusion imaging.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- Pathological features of the differentiation landscape in esophageal squamous cell cancer and their correlations with prognosis.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Development and validation of a nomogram for predicting overall survival in patients with stage III-N2 lung adenocarcinoma based on the SEER database.Translational cancer research · 2023Article
- Inter- and intratumoral proteomics and glycosaminoglycan characterization of ALK rearranged lung adenocarcinoma tissues: a pilot study.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Article
- Tumor grade-associated genomic mutations in Chinese patients with non-small cell lung cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Article
- Multiomics Analysis of Spatially Distinct Stromal Cells Reveals Tumor-Induced O-Glycosylation of the CDK4-pRB Axis in Fibroblasts at the Invasive Tumor Edge.Cancer research · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
- Identification of significant genes as prognostic markers and potential tumor suppressors in lung adenocarcinoma via bioinformatical analysis.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- A 58-Year-Old Man with a Painful Gluteal Mass as the First Presentation of Metastatic Adenocarcinoma of the Lung.The American journal of case reports · 2021Article
- A prognostic model for overall survival of patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: a multicentre, retrospective study.The Lancet. Digital health · 2020Article
- Predictive factors related to pleural dissemination in non-small cell lung cancer.Journal of thoracic disease · 2020Article
- Long non-coding RNA RFPL3S is a novel prognostic biomarker in lung cancer.Oncology letters · 2020Article
- Novel prognostic model for stratifying survival in stage I lung adenocarcinoma patients.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2020Article
- Validating a targeted next-generation sequencing assay and profiling somatic variants in Chinese non-small cell lung cancer patients.Scientific reports · 2020Article
3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough grading has prognostic significance for many tumor types, a prognostically significant grading system for lung adenocarcinoma has not yet been established. The aim of this study was to evaluate histologic characteristics included in tumor grading systems, establish optimal cutoff values that have the strongest association with overall survival, and develop a grading system incorporating the histopathologic characteristics that the authors found to have prognostic significance in patients with lung adenocarcinoma.
methodsThe authors studied lung adenocarcinomas from 85 consecutive patients, and evaluated the percentage of solid pattern (as a reflection of tumor architecture), the degree of cytologic atypia, and the mitotic count.
resultsIn univariate analysis, overall survival was associated significantly with sex (P = .045), age (P = .0008), tumor status (P < .0001), lymph node status (P = .02), solid pattern (P = .046), and cytologic atypia (P = .01), but not with mitotic count (P = .26). On the basis of optimal cutoff values, the authors found that a solid pattern > or = 90% and severe cytologic atypia were the best discriminators of worse outcome. A grading score, computed as the sum of the architecture score and cytologic atypia score (2 = well differentiated, 3 = moderately differentiated, 4 = poorly differentiated), was a significant predictor of overall survival in univariate analysis (median overall survival times, 72.4, 39.5, and 8.7 months for well, moderately, and poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma, respectively; P = .0001). Moreover, grading was an independent predictor of survival in multivariate analysis (P = .002).
conclusionsThe authors describe a grading system that incorporates the percentage of solid pattern and degree of the cytologic atypia that is an independent predictor of survival in patients with lung adenocarcinoma.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.