ArticleOncoTargets and therapy2019
Nodal staging score and adequacy of nodal staging.
Article in OncoTargets and therapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Defining Optimal Lymph Node Yield in Gastrectomy: A Real-World Cohort Analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Article
- Development and validation of nodal staging score in pN0 patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A population study from the SEER database and a single-institution cohort.Thoracic cancer · 2022Article
- Pathologic node-negative lung cancer: Adequacy of lymph node yield and a tool to assess the risk of occult nodal disease.Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2022Article
- Pathological Nodal Staging Score for Gastric Signet Ring Cell Carcinoma: A Clinical Tool of Adequate Nodal Staging.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe number of lymph nodes (LNs) excised in patients with pathologic N0 is limited, and it is very likely that there will be recessive node disease after surgery, so they are at risk of understaging. The purpose of the present study is to develop a nodal staging score (NSS) in a mathematical way to assess the likelihood that a pathologic N0 gastric cancer (GCa) patient has, indeed, no occult nodal disease after surgery. PATIENTS AND
methodsA total of 14,033 stage I-III GCa patients were identified from Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database for analysis. A beta-binomial model was fitted to calculate the probability of missing a nodal disease. This probability is then used to calculate the NSS.
resultsThe probability of missing a nodal disease is decreased with increasing LNs examined across all pT stages. Seven and 24 LNs removed and examined was enough for an NSS of 90% in pT1 and pT2 patients, respectively, ensuring a high confidence of correct nodal negative classification. Twenty-three and 31 LNs examined in pT3 and pT4 patients could also maintain the NSS at 80%, respectively. NSS had a significant impact on patients' survival across all pT stages (all
conclusionThe probability that GCa patients are free of true nodal disease could be provided by NSS-based prediction, which is conducive to postoperative decision and survival surveillance. In addition, NSS can define a subtle standard on how many LNs examined are enough for adequate staging dependent on pT stages. However, at least 16 LNs examined is the standard recommendation to date.
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.