ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2020
Prognostic impact of lymphadenectomy on outcomes of sublobar resection for non-small cell lung cancer ≤1 or >1 to 2 cm.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prognostic impact of the lymph node yield on survival in patients with stage I lung adenocarcinoma receiving sublobar resection.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2026Article
- Impact of the number of dissected lymph nodes on machine learning-based prediction of postoperative lung cancer recurrence: a single-hospital retrospective cohort study.BMJ open respiratory research · 2024Article
- Outcomes of sublobar resection vs lobectomy for invasive clinical stage T1N0 non-small-cell lung cancer: A propensity-match analysis.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2021Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLymphadenectomy is an important part of surgical treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the prognostic impact of lymph node (LN) dissection for patients with NSCLC ≤1 and >1 to 2 cm who underwent sublobar resection is still unclear.
methodsA group of patients numbering 7,627 with NSCLC 2 cm or less who underwent sublobar resection were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between January 2010 and November 2015. The overall survival (OS) and lung cancer-specific survival (LCSS) were evaluated among patients who had undergone dissection of ≥4 LNs, 1 to 3 LNs or who had no-LN dissection; log-rank and Cox proportional-hazards regression analyses were used for the evaluation.
resultsPatients with NSCLC ≤2 cm who underwent ≥4 LNs dissection had better OS and LCSS compared with those who underwent dissection of 1 to 3 LNs or who had no-LN dissection after sublobar resection. Subgroup analysis showed that dissection of ≥4 LNs had better OS and LCSS than those of 1 to 3 LNs dissection in NSCLC >1 to 2 cm, whereas had similar OS and LCSS in NSCLC ≤1 cm. Multivariate Cox analysis showed that dissection of 1 to 3 LNs was not an independent risk factor of OS and LCSS than dissection of ≥4 LNs in NSCLC ≤1 cm after sublobar resection.
conclusionsThe extent of LN dissection is associated with the survival outcomes in patients with NSCLC ≤2 cm after sublobar resection. Dissection of ≥4 LNs should be recommended for NSCLC >1 to 2 cm, whereas surgeons can rely on surgical skills and patient profiles to decide ≥4 LNs or 1 to 3 LNs dissection for NSCLC ≤1 cm during sublobar resection.
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.