ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2020
Clinical adjustability of radiological tools in patients with surgically resected cT1N0-staged non-small-cell lung cancer from the long-term survival evaluation.
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, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prognostic value of consolidation-to-tumor ratio on computed tomography in NSCLC: a meta-analysis.World journal of surgical oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Efficacy of a combined tool for stage I non-small cell lung cancer against lymph node metastasis.Oncology letters · 2022Article
- Permissible Outcomes of Lobe-Specific Lymph Node Dissection for Elevated Carcinoembryonic Antigen in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Article
- Narrative review of optimal prognostic radiological tools using computed tomography for T1N0-staged non-small cell lung cancer.Journal of thoracic disease · 2021Review
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
backgroundVarious radiological tools have been introduced to determine the malignancy or prognosis of lung carcinomas. We retrospectively summarized the clinical outcomes to evaluate whether radiological tools such as consolidation-to-tumor ratio (CTR), tumor disappearance ratio (TDR), and mediastinal diameter (MD) are suitable for surgically resected non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
methodsThis retrospective study included 260 patients (128 men and 132 women; median age, 64 years) with cT1N0-staged NSCLC who underwent thoracotomy. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) outcomes were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model.
resultsWhen the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with reference to cT1a/1 mi were calculated, significant differences were observed in cT1b and cT1c for DFS (P=0.04 and P<0.01, respectively) and in cT1c for OS (P=0.01). For HRs with reference to CTR (≤0.5), a significant difference was only observed in CTR (>0.5) for DFS (P=0.01). For HRs with reference to TDR (≤25%), significant differences were observed in TDR (>75%) for DFS (P=0.02) and OS (P=0.02). For HRs with reference to MD (≤5 mm), significant differences were observed in 6-20 mm (P=0.04) and >20 mm (P=0.02) for DFS and in >20 mm (P=0.02) for OS.
conclusionsAll radiological tools revealed significant correlations with prognosis in the patients with cT1N0-staged NSCLCs. We recommend the use of MD in a clinical context. However, further investigation of this issue is needed.
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.