ArticleTranslational lung cancer research2016
Prognostic value of lymph node ratio in patients with pathological N1 non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review with meta-analysis.
Article in Translational lung cancer research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prognostic factors in resected non-small cell lung cancer with pathological N1 lymph node involvement: a survival analysis.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2026Article
- Prognostic value of lymph node metrics in lung squamous cell carcinoma: an analysis of the SEER database.World journal of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Lung Cancer Staging Project: Overview of Challenges and Opportunities in Revising the Nodal Classification of Lung Cancer.Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer · 2023Review
- Article
- The Positive Lymph Node Ratio Predicts Survival in TFrontiers in oncology · 2020Article
- Prognostic significance of the pattern of pathological N1 lymph node metastases for non-small cell lung cancer.Journal of thoracic disease · 2019Article
- The surgeon thunderbolts in 2016 lung cancer literature.Annals of translational medicine · 2018Article
- Prognostic value of number of negative lymph node in patients with stage II and IIIa non-small cell lung cancer.Oncotarget · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNon-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with N1 disease have variable outcomes, and additional prognostic factors are needed. The number of positive lymph nodes (LNs) has been proposed as a prognostic indicator. However, the number of positive LNs depends on the number of LNs examined from the resection specimen. The lymph node ratio (LNR) can circumvent this limitation. The purpose of this study is to evaluate LNR as a predictor of survival and recurrence in patients with pathologic N1 NSCLC.
methodsWe systematically reviewed studies published before March 17, 2016, on the prognostic value of LNR in patients with pathologic N1 NSCLC. The hazard ratios (HRs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to combine the data. We also evaluated heterogeneity and publication bias.
resultsFive studies published between 2010 and 2014 were eligible for this systematic review with meta-analysis. The total number of patients included was 6,130 ranging from 75 to 4,004 patients per study. The combined HR for all eligible studies evaluating the overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of N1 LNR in patients with pathologic N1 NSCLC was 1.53 (95% CI: 1.22-1.85) and 1.64 (95% CI: 1.19-2.09), respectively. We found no heterogeneity and publication bias between the reports.
conclusionsLNR is a worthy predictor of survival and cancer recurrence in patients with pathological N1 NSCLC.
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.