Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30148659›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology2018

Clinical Significance of 4L Lymph Node Dissection in Left Lung Cancer.

Ya-Nan Wang, Shuang Yao, Chang-Li Wang, Mei-Shuang Li, Lei-Na Sun, Qing-Na Yan, Shao-Wen Tang, Zhen-Fa Zhang

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ya-Nan WangYa-Nan Wang, Shuang Yao, Chang-Li Wang, Mei-Shuang Li, Lei-Na Sun, Qing-Na Yan, and Zhen-Fa Zhang, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin; and Shao-Wen Tang, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Shuang YaoYa-Nan Wang, Shuang Yao, Chang-Li Wang, Mei-Shuang Li, Lei-Na Sun, Qing-Na Yan, and Zhen-Fa Zhang, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin; and Shao-Wen Tang, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Chang-Li WangYa-Nan Wang, Shuang Yao, Chang-Li Wang, Mei-Shuang Li, Lei-Na Sun, Qing-Na Yan, and Zhen-Fa Zhang, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin; and Shao-Wen Tang, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Mei-Shuang LiYa-Nan Wang, Shuang Yao, Chang-Li Wang, Mei-Shuang Li, Lei-Na Sun, Qing-Na Yan, and Zhen-Fa Zhang, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin; and Shao-Wen Tang, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Lei-Na SunYa-Nan Wang, Shuang Yao, Chang-Li Wang, Mei-Shuang Li, Lei-Na Sun, Qing-Na Yan, and Zhen-Fa Zhang, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin; and Shao-Wen Tang, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Qing-Na YanYa-Nan Wang, Shuang Yao, Chang-Li Wang, Mei-Shuang Li, Lei-Na Sun, Qing-Na Yan, and Zhen-Fa Zhang, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin; and Shao-Wen Tang, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Shao-Wen TangYa-Nan Wang, Shuang Yao, Chang-Li Wang, Mei-Shuang Li, Lei-Na Sun, Qing-Na Yan, and Zhen-Fa Zhang, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin; and Shao-Wen Tang, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Zhen-Fa ZhangYa-Nan Wang, Shuang Yao, Chang-Li Wang, Mei-Shuang Li, Lei-Na Sun, Qing-Na Yan, and Zhen-Fa Zhang, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin; and Shao-Wen Tang, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo investigate the prognostic impact of 4L lymph node (LN) dissection in left lung cancer and to analyze the relative risk factors for 4L LN metastasis. PATIENTS AND

methodsWe retrospectively collected data from 657 patients with primary left lung cancer who underwent surgical pulmonary resection from January 2005 to December 2009. One hundred thirty-nine patients underwent 4L LN dissection (4L

resultsThe metastasis rate of station 4L was 20.9%, which was significantly higher than those of station 7 (14.0%; P = .048) and station 9 (9.8%; P < .001). Station 4L metastasis was associated with most other LN station metastases in univariate analysis, but only station 10 LN metastasis was an independent risk factor for 4L LN metastasis (odds ratio, 0.253; 95% CI, 0.109 to 0.588; P = .001) in multivariate logistic analysis. The 4L

conclusionStation 4L LN involvement is not rare in left lung cancer, and dissection of the 4L LN station seems to be associated with a more favorable prognosis as compared with those who did not undergo this dissection.

Indexed as

AdultAgedCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateLung NeoplasmsLymphatic MetastasisLymph Node ExcisionMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID30148659
OpenAlexW2889287160

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.