ArticleMedicine2020
Efficacy of measuring the invasive diameter of lung adenocarcinoma using mediastinal window settings: A retrospective study.
Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Proper clinical and pathologic T stage among diverse T descriptors in terms of recurrence after curative surgery for stage I lung adenocarcinoma.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
- Comparison of outcomes following lobectomy, segmentectomy, and wedge resection based on pathological subtyping in patients with pN0 invasive lung adenocarcinoma ≤1 cm.Cancer medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The recently published 8th edition of the tumor node and metastasis Classification of Lung Cancer proposes using the maximum dimension of the solid component of a ground glass nodule (GGN) for the T categorization. However, few studies have investigated the collection of this information when using mediastinal window settings. In this study, we evaluated tumor measurement data obtained from computed tomography (CT) scans when using mediastinal window settings.This study included 202 selected patients with persistent, partly solid GGNs detected on thin-slice CT after surgical treatment between 2004 and 2013. We compared the differences in tumor diameters measured by 2 different radiologists using a repeated-measures analysis of variance. We divided the patients into 2 groups based on the clinical T stage (T1a+T1b vs T1c) and estimated the probability of overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) using Kaplan-Meier curves.The study included 94 male and 108 female patients. The inter-reviewer differences between tumor diameters were significantly smaller when the consolidation to maximum tumor diameter ratio was ≤0.5. The 2 clinical groups classified by clinical T stage differed significantly with respect to DFS when using the mediastinal window settings. However, no significant differences in OS or DFS were observed when using the lung window setting.Our study yielded 2 major findings. First, the diameters of GGNs could be measured more accurately using the mediastinal window setting. Second, measurements obtained using the mediastinal window setting more clearly depicted the effect of clinical T stage on DFS.
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.