Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29432718›Full record

ArticleThe Annals of thoracic surgery2018

Natural History of Ground-Glass Lesions Among Patients With Previous Lung Cancer.

Jitesh B Shewale, David B Nelson, David C Rice, Boris Sepesi, Wayne L Hofstetter, Reza J Mehran, Ara A Vaporciyan, Garrett L Walsh, Stephen G Swisher, Jack A Roth and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The Annals of thoracic surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Intestinal Metaplasia in the Esophageal Remnant Is Rare After Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2021
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. The elusive ground glass opacity, revealed.Journal of thoracic disease · 2018
    Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Jitesh B ShewaleDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas; Department of Epidemiology, Human Genetics and Environmental Sciences, UTHealth School of Public Health, Houston, Texas.
David B NelsonDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
David C RiceDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Boris SepesiDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Wayne L HofstetterDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Reza J MehranDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Ara A VaporciyanDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Garrett L WalshDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Stephen G SwisherDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Jack A RothDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
Mara B AntonoffDepartment of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas. Electronic address: mbantonoff@mdanderson.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAmong patients with previous lung cancer, the malignant potential of subsequent ground-glass opacities (GGOs) on computed tomography remains unknown, with a lack of consensus regarding surveillance and intervention. This study sought to describe the natural history of GGO in patients with a history of lung cancer.

methodsA retrospective review was performed of 210 patients with a history of lung cancer and ensuing computed tomography evidence of pure or mixed GGOs between 2007 and 2013. Computed tomography reports were reviewed to determine the fate of the GGOs, by classifying all lesions as stable, resolved, or progressive over the course of the study. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify predictors of GGO progression and resolution.

resultsThe mean follow-up time was 13 months. During this period, 55 (26%) patients' GGOs were stable, 131 (62%) resolved, and 24 (11%) progressed. Of the 24 GGOs that progressed, three were subsequently diagnosed as adenocarcinoma. Patients of black race (odds ratio [OR], 0.26) and other races besides white (OR, 0.89) had smaller odds of GGO resolution (p = 0.033), whereas patients with previous lung squamous cell carcinoma (OR, 5.16) or small cell carcinoma (OR, 5.36) were more likely to experience GGO resolution (p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, only a history of adenocarcinoma was an independent predictor of GGO progression (OR, 6.9; p = 0.011).

conclusionsAmong patients with a history of lung cancer, prior adenocarcinoma emerged as a predictor of GGO progression, whereas a history of squamous cell carcinoma or small cell carcinoma and white race were identified as predictors of GGO resolution.

Indexed as

Academic Medical CentersAdenocarcinomaAgedAged, 80 and overAnalysis of VarianceCancer Care FacilitiesCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungCohort StudiesDisease ProgressionFemaleHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisNeoplasm Recurrence, Local

Identifiers

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.