ArticleThoracic cancer2021
Can computed tomography differentiate adenocarcinoma in situ from minimally invasive adenocarcinoma?
Article in Thoracic cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of an improved YOLOv5s-based deep learning model for automated detection of pulmonary adenocarcinomaFrontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- A Novel Scale for Diagnosis of Pulmonary Ground-Glass Nodules: A Multicenter and Ambispective Cohort Study.The clinical respiratory journal · 2024Article
- A nomogram for predicting invasiveness of lung adenocarcinoma manifesting as ground-glass nodules based on follow-up CT imaging.Translational lung cancer research · 2024Article
- Correlation Analysis of Computed Tomography Features and Pathological Types of Multifocal Ground-Glass Nodular Lung Adenocarcinoma.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Article
- Can computed tomography differentiate adenocarcinoma in situ from minimally invasive adenocarcinoma?Thoracic cancer · 2021Article
- Computed Tomography-Guided Transthoracic Needle Biopsy: Predictors for Diagnostic Failure and Tissue Adequacy for Molecular Testing.Frontiers in medicine · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGiven the subtle pathological signs of adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) and minimally invasive adenocarcinoma (MIA), effective differentiation between the two entities is crucial. However, it is difficult to predict these conditions using preoperative computed tomography (CT) imaging. In this study, we investigated whether histological diagnosis of AIS and MIA using quantitative three-dimensional CT imaging analysis could be predicted.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the images and histopathological findings of patients with lung cancer who were diagnosed with AIS or MIA between January 2017 and June 2018. We used Synapse Vincent (v. 4.3) (Fujifilm) software to analyze the CT attenuation values and performed a histogram analysis.
resultsThere were 22 patients with AIS and 22 with MIA. The ground-glass nodule (GGN) rate was significantly higher in patients with AIS (p < 0.001), whereas the solid volume (p < 0.001) and solid rate (p = 0.001) were significantly higher in those with MIA. The mean (p = 0.002) and maximum (p = 0.025) CT values were significantly higher in patients with MIA. The 25th, 50th, 75th, and 97.5th percentiles (all p < 0.05) for the CT values were significantly higher in patients with MIA.
conclusionsWe demonstrated that quantitative analysis of 3D-CT imaging data using software can help distinguish AIS from MIA. These analyses are useful for guiding decision-making in the surgical management of early lung cancer, as well as subsequent follow-up.
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.