Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32206551›Full record

ArticleTranslational lung cancer research2020

Extent of resection and lymph node evaluation in early stage metachronous second primary lung cancer: a population-based study.

Rusi Zhang, Gongming Wang, Yongbin Lin, Yingsheng Wen, Zirui Huang, Xuewen Zhang, Xiangyang Yu, Weidong Wang, Kexing Xi, Robert J Cerfolio and 6 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Translational lung cancer research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 4 institutions in 5 countries.

Rusi ZhangState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou 510060, China.
Gongming WangState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou 510060, China.
Yongbin LinState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou 510060, China.
Yingsheng WenState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou 510060, China.
Zirui HuangState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou 510060, China.
Xuewen ZhangState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou 510060, China.
Xiangyang YuDepartment of Thoracic Surgical Oncology, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Weidong WangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310003, China.
Kexing XiDepartment of Colorectal Surgery, National Cancer Center/National Clinical Research Center for Cancer/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China.
Robert J CerfolioDepartment of Cardiothoracic Surgery, New York University Langone Health, New York, NY, USA.
Xavier Benoit D'JournoDepartment of Thoracic Surgery and Diseases of Esophagus, Aix-Marseille University, Hôpital Nord, Marseille, France.
Kurt RuetzlerDepartments of Outcomes Research and General Anesthesiology, Anesthesiology Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Main Campus, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Lieven DepypereDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Pier Luigi FilossoDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Torino, Italy.
Lanjun ZhangState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou 510060, China.
written on behalf of AME Thoracic Surgery Collaborative Group
Sun Yat-sen University · CNChinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNAix-Marseille Université · FRCleveland Clinic · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvidence of the optimal surgery strategy for early stage metachronous second primary lung cancer (SPLC) has been limited and controversial. This study aims to compare the survival outcomes of different extents of resection and lymph node evaluation in these patients.

methodsEarly stage metachronous SPLC patients, who had received lobectomy for initial primary lung cancer (IPLC) and developed SPLC more than 3 months later, were selected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database according to the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) guideline. Overall survival (OS) and lung cancer-specific survival (CSS) of different extents of resection and lymph node evaluation were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method and multivariate Cox regression model.

resultsOverall, 1,784 SPLC patients without nodal or distant metastasis were identified. Lobectomy was associated with significantly longer OS (HR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.71-0.97, 5-year survival: 59.2%

conclusionsLobectomy and thorough lymph node evaluation provided significantly longer survival, and thus should be considered for early stage metachronous SPLC whenever possible.

Indexed as

lymph node excisionNon-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)pulmonary surgical proceduressecond primary cancer

Identifiers

PMID32206551
PMCPMC7082285
OpenAlexW3007818224

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.