Trial reportThe Lancet. Respiratory medicine2018
Perioperative mortality and morbidity after sublobar versus lobar resection for early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer: post-hoc analysis of an international, randomised, phase 3 trial (CALGB/Alliance 140503).
Trial report in The Lancet. Respiratory medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 217 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
A Phase III Randomized Trial of Lobectomy Versus Sublobar Resection for Small (≤ 2 cm) Peripheral Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Comparison of Segmentectomy Versus Lobectomy for Early-stage Non-small Cell Lung Cancer ≤ 2 cm in the Middle Third of the Lung Field: A Prospective and Multi-center RCT Study
Who cites it
217 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Three-Dimensional Reconstruction and Virtual Simulation of Patient-Specific Anatomy for Procedural Planning in Thoracoscopic Segmentectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Changes in quality of life of early-stage lung cancer patients undergoing sublobar resection: a systematic review.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Sublobar resection versus lobectomy for stage IA non-small-cell lung cancer ≤ 2 cm: a systematic review and patient-level meta-analysis.Updates in surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Development and validation of a deep learning signature for predicting lymph node metastasis in lung adenocarcinoma: comparison with radiomics signature and clinical-semantic model.European radiology · 2023Trial
- Lobar or Sublobar Resection for Peripheral Stage IA Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.The New England journal of medicine · 2023Trial
- A Randomized, Phase III Study of Sublobar Resection (SR) Versus Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy (SAbR) in High-Risk Patients with Stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC).Annals of surgical oncology · 2022Trial
- A transfer learning-based hybrid deep- and machine-learning regression approach for predicting the postoperative pulmonary function.European radiology experimental · 2026Article
- Multimodal digital assessment of early recovery after chest tube omission in early-stage lung cancer patients undergoing wedge resection: a post hoc analysis of a prospective cohort.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Article
- Article
- Association of resection type, nodal evaluation, and survival in early-stage lung squamous cell carcinoma.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Marginal benefit of segmentectomy over lobectomy in minimally invasive surgery for stage IA lung cancer.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Article
- Continuous suture ligation of segmental hilar structures is associated with reduced prolonged air leak after pulmonary segmentectomy.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Perioperative recovery and survival after lobectomy versus sublobar resection in adults aged ≥ 70 years with NSCLC ≤ 3 cm: complementary SEER and real-world cohort analyses.BMC geriatrics · 2026Observational
- Predictors of prolonged hospital stay in patients with lung cancer undergoing sublobar resection.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Article
- Improving lung cancer screening diagnostic efficiency.Current opinion in pulmonary medicine · 2026Review
- Three-Dimensional Bronchovascular Modelling in Sublobar Pulmonary Resection: A Tool for Personalised Thoracic Surgery.Journal of personalized medicine · 2026Review
- Effectiveness and safety of cryoablation therapy for early-stage lung cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Age-related differences in pleural adhesion and perioperative outcomes in uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery segmentectomy.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Robotic segmentectomy in a day-surgery setting: feasibility is proven, but is it always appropriate?Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- A Retrospective Comparison of Oncologic and Staging Outcomes Between Surgical Procedures-Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery Versus Thoracotomy in Pulmonary Adenocarcinoma.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
157 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIncreased detection of small-sized, peripheral, non-small-cell lung cancer has renewed interest in sublobar resection instead of lobectomy, the traditional standard of care for early-stage lung cancer. We aimed to assess morbidity and mortality associated with lobar and sublobar resection for early-stage lung cancer.
methodsCALGB/Alliance 140503 is a multicentre, international, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial in patients with peripheral non-small-cell lung cancer clinically staged as T1aN0. Patients were recruited from 69 academic and community-based institutions in Australia, Canada, and the USA. Patients were randomly assigned intraoperatively to either lobar or sublobar resection. The random assignment was based on permuted block randomisation without concealment and was stratified according to radiographic tumour size, histology, and smoking status. The primary endpoint of the trial is disease-free survival; here, we report a post-hoc, exploratory, comparative analysis of perioperative mortality and morbidity associated with lobar and sublobar resection. Perioperative mortality was defined as death from any cause within 30 days and 90 days of surgical intervention and was calculated for all randomised patients. Morbidity was graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis for randomised patients with data available. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00499330.
findingsBetween June 15, 2007, and March 13, 2017, 697 patients were randomly allocated to either lobar resection (n=357) or sublobar resection (n=340; 59% wedge resection). Six (0·9%) patients died by 30 days, four (1·1%) after lobar resection and two (0·6%) after sublobar resection; by 90 days, ten (1·4%) patients had died, six (1·7%) after lobar resection and four (1·2%) after sublobar resection (difference at 30 days, 0·5%, 95% CI -1·1 to 2·3; difference at 90 days, 0·5%, 95% CI -1·5 to 2·6). An adverse event of any grade occurred in 193 (54%) of 355 patients after lobar resection and 172 (51%) of 337 patients after sublobar resection. Adverse events of grade 3 or worse occurred in 54 (15%) patients assigned lobar resection and in 48 (14%) patients assigned sublobar resection. No differences between surgical approaches were noted in cardiac or pulmonary complications. Grade 3 haemorrhage (requiring transfusion) occurred in six (2%) patients assigned lobar resection and eight (2%) patients assigned sublobar resection. Prolonged air leak occurred in nine (3%) patients after lobar resection and two (1%) patients after sublobar resection.
interpretationOur post-hoc analysis showed that perioperative mortality and morbidity did not seem to differ between lobar and sublobar resection in physically and functionally fit patients with clinical T1aN0 non-small-cell lung cancer. These data may affect the daily choices made by patients and their doctors in establishing the best treatment approach for stage I lung cancer.
fundingNational Cancer Institute.
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.