ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2020
Is invasive mediastinal staging necessary in intermediate risk patients with negative PET/CT?
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Breaking: The New 9Thoracic research and practice · 2026Article
- Presurgical invasive mediastinal staging in lung cancer, unexpected N2 and long-term survival: a registry-based study with data from the Spanish group for video-assisted thoracic surgery.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Article
- Clinical Effect of Endosonography on Overall Survival in Patients with Radiological N1 Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.Cancer research and treatment · 2024Article
- Rate and Predictors of Unforeseen PN1/PN2-Disease in Surgically Treated cN0 NSCLC-Patients with Primary Tumor > 3 cm: Nationwide Results from Italian VATS-Group Database.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTumor involvement of mediastinal lymph nodes is of high importance in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Invasive mediastinal staging is recommended in selected patients without evidence of mediastinal involvement on staging by imaging. In the present study we aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of invasive mediastinal staging in reducing pN2, its impact on survival and the risk factors for occult pN2.
methodsPatients with NSCLC tumors larger than 3 cm, central tumors or cN1 cases treated in our institution between 2013 and 2018 were prospectively included in the study. Incidence of pN2 and overall survival was compared among invasively staged (IS) and non-invasively staged groups (NIS). Multivariate analysis was performed to identify risk factors of pN2.
resultsA total of 201 patients were included in the study, 79 (39.3%) of whom were not invasively staged (NIS group) and 122 (60.7%) were invasively staged (IS group). Incidence of cN1 and mean PET/CT uptake was different among both groups. Prevalence of pN2 was similar in both groups (7.6% in NIS
conclusionsInvasive staging does not reduce the incidence of pN2. However, this finding could be biased because in our series cN1 patients were more often staged and cN1 has been detected as a risk factor for pN2. In addition patient better selection after invasive staging might have an impact on overall survival. To conclude, invasive mediastinal staging in intermediate risk patients for positive mediastinal nodes is justified.
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.