Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30710518›Full record

ArticleThe Annals of thoracic surgery2019

Prediction Model for Nodal Disease Among Patients With Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

Francys C Verdial, David K Madtes, Billanna Hwang, Michael S Mulligan, Katherine Odem-Davis, Rachel Waworuntu, Douglas E Wood, Farhood Farjah

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Annals of thoracic surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Francys C VerdialDepartment of Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington.
David K MadtesDivision of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington.
Billanna HwangDepartment of Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington; Center for Lung Biology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Michael S MulliganDepartment of Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington; Center for Lung Biology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Katherine Odem-DavisSeattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, Washington.
Rachel WaworuntuDepartment of Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington; Center for Lung Biology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Douglas E WoodDepartment of Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington.
Farhood FarjahDepartment of Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington. Electronic address: ffarjah@uw.edu.

Funding

Renewal: Gastrointestinal Surgery Outcomes Research FellowshipT32DK070555 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI FLUM, DAVID R · 2010 to 2024
$3.6M
NIDDK NIH HHS T32 DK070555
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe characterized the performance characteristics of guideline-recommended invasive mediastinal staging (IMS) for lung cancer and developed a prediction model for nodal disease as a potential alternative approach to staging.

methodsWe conducted a prospective cohort study of adults with suspected/confirmed non-small cell lung cancer without evidence of distant metastatic disease (by computed tomography/positron emission tomography) who underwent nodal evaluation by IMS and/or at the time of resection. The true-positive rate was the proportion of patients with true nodal disease selected to undergo IMS based on guideline recommendations, and the false-positive rate was the proportion of patients without true nodal disease selected to undergo IMS. Logistic regression was used to predict nodal disease using radiographic predictors.

resultsAmong 123 eligible subjects, 31 (25%) had pathologically confirmed nodal disease. A guideline-recommended invasive staging strategy had a true-positive rate and false-positive rate of 100% and 65%, respectively. The prediction model fit the data well (goodness-of-fit test, p = 0.55) and had excellent discrimination (optimism corrected c-statistic, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.72 to 0.89). Exploratory analysis revealed that use of the prediction model could achieve a false-positive rate of 44% and a true-positive rate of 97%.

conclusionsA guideline-recommended strategy for IMS selects all patients with true nodal disease and most patients without nodal disease for IMS. Our prediction model appears to maintain (within a margin of error) the sensitivity of a guideline-recommended invasive staging strategy and has the potential to reduce the use of invasive procedures.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalAgedCarcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungCohort StudiesFemaleForecastingHumansLung NeoplasmsLymphatic MetastasisMaleMediastinumNeoplasm StagingPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyProspective Studies

Identifiers

PMID30710518
PMCPMC6535349

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.