Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26712103›Full record

ArticleClinical lung cancer2016

Association Between Computed Tomographic Features and Kirsten Rat Sarcoma Viral Oncogene Mutations in Patients With Stage I Lung Adenocarcinoma and Their Prognostic Value.

Hua Wang, Matthew B Schabath, Ying Liu, Olya Stringfield, Yoganand Balagurunathan, John J Heine, Steven A Eschrich, Zhaoxiang Ye, Robert J Gillies

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical lung cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Hua WangDepartment of Radiology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center of Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, China; Department of Cancer Imaging and Metabolism, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL.
Matthew B SchabathDepartment of Cancer Epidemiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL.
Ying LiuDepartment of Radiology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center of Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, China; Department of Cancer Imaging and Metabolism, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL.
Olya StringfieldDepartment of Cancer Imaging and Metabolism, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL.
Yoganand BalagurunathanDepartment of Cancer Imaging and Metabolism, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL.
John J HeineDepartment of Cancer Imaging and Metabolism, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL.
Steven A EschrichDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL.
Zhaoxiang YeDepartment of Radiology, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, National Clinical Research Center of Cancer, Key Laboratory of Cancer Prevention and Therapy, Tianjin, China. Electronic address: yezhaoxiang@163.com.
Robert J GilliesDepartment of Cancer Imaging and Metabolism, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL; Department of Radiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL. Electronic address: robert.gillies@moffitt.org.
Moffitt Cancer Center · USTianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital · CN

Funding

TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCHP30CA076292 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA · PI KENNETH Lynn WRIGHT · 1998 to 2026
$93.5M
SPORE in Lung CancerP50CA119997 · NCI · H. LEE MOFFITT CANCER CTR & RES INST · PI GABRILOVICH, DMITRY I · 2008 to 2012
$11.0M
Radiomics of NSCLCU01CA143062 · NCI · H. LEE MOFFITT CANCER CTR & RES INST · PI GILLIES, ROBERT J., SCHABATH, MATTHEW B. · 2010 to 2020
$5.7M
Non-invasive evaluation of indeterminate pulmonary nodulesU01CA186145 · NCI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI MASSION, PIERRE P. · 2015 to 2019
$2.0M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA076292NCI NIH HHS P50 CA119997NCI NIH HHS U01 CA143062NCI NIH HHS U01 CA186145
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe investigated the association between computed tomographic (CT) features and Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene (KRAS) mutations in patients with stage I lung adenocarcinoma and their prognostic value. PATIENTS AND

methodsA total of 79 patients with pathologic stage I lung adenocarcinoma, available KRAS mutational status, preoperative CT images available, and survival data were included in the present study. Seven CT features, including spiculation, concavity, ground-glass opacity, bubble-like lucency, air bronchogram, pleural retraction, and pleural attachment, were evaluated. The association among the clinical characteristics, CT features, and mutational status was analyzed using Student's t test, the χ(2) test or Fisher's exact test, and logistic regression. The association among CT features, mutational status, and overall survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves with the log-rank test and Cox proportional hazard regression.

resultsThe prevalence of KRAS mutations was 41.77%. Spiculation was significantly associated with the presence of KRAS mutations (odds ratio, 2.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.16-7.68). Although KRAS mutational status was not significantly associated with overall survival, the presence of pleural attachment was associated with an increased risk of death (hazard ratio, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.09-5.53). When analyzing KRAS mutational status and pleural attachment combined, patients with wild-type KRAS and no pleural attachment had significantly better survival than did those with wild-type KRAS and pleural attachment (P = .014).

conclusionThese data suggest that spiculation is associated with KRAS mutations and pleural attachment is associated with overall survival in patients with stage I lung adenocarcinoma. Combining the analysis of KRAS mutational status and CT features could better predict survival.

Indexed as

Tomography, X-Ray ComputedAdenocarcinomaAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedMutationNeoplasm StagingPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)Survival AnalysisKRAS protein, humanProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)Computed tomographyImagingKRASLung neoplasmsPrognosis

Identifiers

PMID26712103
PMCPMC4887405
OpenAlexW2269767062

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.