Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27177840›Full record

ArticleThe Annals of thoracic surgery2016

Neither Maximum Tumor Size nor Solid Component Size Is Prognostic in Part-Solid Lung Cancer: Impact of Tumor Size Should Be Applied Exclusively to Solid Lung Cancer.

Aritoshi Hattori, Takeshi Matsunaga, Kazuya Takamochi, Shiaki Oh, Kenji Suzuki

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The Annals of thoracic surgery, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
69citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

69 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 146 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Multimodal deep learning radiomics model for predicting postoperative progression in solid stage I non-small cell lung cancer.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2024
    Article

9 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Aritoshi HattoriDepartment of General Thoracic Surgery, Juntendo University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Takeshi MatsunagaDepartment of General Thoracic Surgery, Juntendo University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Kazuya TakamochiDepartment of General Thoracic Surgery, Juntendo University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Shiaki OhDepartment of General Thoracic Surgery, Juntendo University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Kenji SuzukiDepartment of General Thoracic Surgery, Juntendo University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan. Electronic address: kjsuzuki@juntendo.ac.jp.
Juntendo University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe aimed to investigate the prognostic impact of tumor size based on the consolidation status by thin-section computed tomography.

methodsWe evaluated 1,181 surgically resected clinical N0 M0 non-small cell lung carcinomas. Consolidation tumor ratio (CTR) was evaluated for all, and tumors were classified into three groups, namely pure ground-glass opacity (CTR = 0; n = 168), part-solid (0 < CTR < 1.0; n = 448), and solid (CTR = 1.0; n = 565). The impact of tumor size was assessed based on CTR using Cox proportional hazards model.

resultsTumor size significantly differentiated the 5-year overall survival (≤20 mm; n = 638: 93.4%; 21-30 mm; n = 284: 84.2%; 31-50 mm; n = 193: 69.3%; ≥51 mm; n = 66: 43.5%; p < 0.0001). When we evaluated the impact of tumor size based on CTR, the 5-year overall survival differed significantly in patients with radiologic solid lung cancer (≤20 mm: 83.0%; 21-30 mm: 75.4%; 31-50 mm: 56.2%; ≥51 mm: 45.3%; p < 0.0001). In contrast, it did not affect the 5-year overall survival in patients with radiologic pure ground-glass opacity (100% regardless of the tumor sizes) and part-solid lung cancer (≤20 mm: 97.7%; 21-30 mm: 94.6%; 31-50 mm: 93.4%; p = 0.1028; 0 < CTR ≤ 0.5: 98.4%; 0.5 < CTR < 1.0: 95.0%; p = 0.1247). Furthermore, maximum tumor size (p = 0.6370), solid component size (p = 0.2340), and CTR (p = 0.1395) were not associated with poor overall survival in radiologic part-solid lung cancer.

conclusionsThe impact of maximum tumor size should be applied only to radiologic solid lung cancer without the ground-glass opacity component on thin-section computed tomography. On the other hand, we recommend that pure ground-glass opacity and part-solid lung cancers be described, respectively, as clinical-Tis and clinical-T1a, which are independent of maximum tumor size and solid component size on thin-section computed tomography.

Indexed as

Neoplasm StagingAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansJapanLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedPneumonectomyPrognosisRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID27177840
OpenAlexW2368566839

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.