ReviewInnovative surgical sciences2020
Validation of the 8th lung cancer TNM classification and clinical staging system in a German cohort of surgically resected patients.
Review in Innovative surgical sciences, 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Silencing of circRPPH1 Inhibits the Progression of Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Through miR-326/ERBB4 Signal Axis.Biochemical genetics · 2025Article
- Development and validation of a nomogram for predicting 90-day mortality in patients with advanced lung cancer based on inflammatory and nutritional biomarkers.American journal of cancer research · 2025Article
- Non-metastatic hip fractures surgery in patients with active cancer: benefit and risk.International orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Upfront surgery for stage IIIA/B non-small cell lung cancer: retrospective cohort study.BJS open · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe updated 8th edition of the tumor, node, metastases (TNM) classification system for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) attempts to improve on the previous 7th edition in predicting outcomes and guiding management decisions. This study sought to determine whether the 8th edition was more accurate in predicting long-term survival in a European population of surgically treated NSCLC patients.
methodsWe scanned the archives of the Heckeshorn Lung Clinic for patients with preoperative clinical stages of IIIA or lower (based on the 7th edition), who received surgery for NSCLC between 2009 and 2014. We used pathologists' reports and data on tumor size and location to reassign tumor stages according to the 8th edition. We then analyzed stage specific survival and compared the accuracy of the two systems in predicting long-term survival. We excluded patients with neoadjuvant treatment, incomplete follow-up data, tumor histologies other than NSCLC, or death within 30 days of surgery.
resultsThe final analysis included 1,013 patients. Overall five-year survival was 47.3%. The median overall survival (OS) was 63 months (range 1-222), and the median disease-free survival (DFS) was 50 months (0-122). The median follow-up time for non-censored patients was 84 months (range 60-122).
conclusionsWe found significant survival differences between the newly defined stages 1A1, 1A2 and 1A3 (previously 1A). We also found that the 8th edition of TMN classification was a significantly better predictor of long-term survival, compared to the 7th edition.
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.