ArticleJournal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer2021
Outcomes After Use of a Lymph Node Collection Kit for Lung Cancer Surgery: A Pragmatic, Population-Based, Multi-Institutional, Staggered Implementation Study.
Article in Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Characterizing phantom lymph node collection during curative-intent resection of non-small cell lung cancer.The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery · 2026Article
- Network-based single-cell analysis identifies a proliferative GZMBJournal of translational medicine · 2026Article
- Lymphatic vascular invasion: Diagnostic variability and overall survival impact on patients undergoing surgical resection.JTCVS open · 2024Article
- Outcomes of Resected Lung Cancer Diagnosed Through Screening and Incidental Pulmonary Nodule Programs in a Mississippi Delta Cohort.JTO clinical and research reports · 2024Article
- Clinical and economic outcomes associated with lymph node examination status in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: a real-world US study using the SEER-Medicare linked database.Translational cancer research · 2024Article
- Two Interventions on Pathologic Nodal Staging in a Population-Based Lung Cancer Resection Cohort.The Annals of thoracic surgery · 2024Article
- Article
- Surgeon Quality and Patient Survival After Resection for Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023Article
- Institution-Level Evolution of Lung Cancer Resection Quality With Implementation of a Lymph Node Specimen Collection Kit.Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer · 2023Article
- Identification of Factors Related to the Quality of Lymphadenectomy for Lung Cancer: Secondary Analysis of Prospective Randomized Trial Data.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Advancing rapid cycle research in cancer care delivery: a National Cancer Institute workshop report.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2023Article
- Rates of Guideline-Concordant Surgery and Adjuvant Chemotherapy Among Patients With Early-Stage Lung Cancer in the US ALCHEMIST Study (Alliance A151216).JAMA oncology · 2022Article
- Trends in Accuracy and Comprehensiveness of Pathology Reports for Resected NSCLC in a High Mortality Area of the United States.Journal of thoracic oncology : official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer · 2021Article
- Article
- Impact of a Lymph Node Specimen Collection Kit on the Distribution and Survival Implications of the Proposed Revised Lung Cancer Residual Disease Classification: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.JTO clinical and research reports · 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
18 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionSuboptimal pathologic nodal staging prevails after curative-intent resection of lung cancer. We evaluated the impact of a lymph node specimen collection kit on lung cancer surgery outcomes in a prospective, population-based, staggered implementation study.
methodsFrom January 1, 2014, to August 28, 2018, we implemented the kit in three homogeneous institutional cohorts involving 11 eligible hospitals from four contiguous hospital referral regions. Our primary outcome was pathologic nodal staging quality, defined by the following evidence-based measures: the number of lymph nodes or stations examined, proportions with poor-quality markers such as nonexamination of lymph nodes, and aggregate quality benchmarks including the National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria. Additional outcomes included perioperative complications, health care utilization, and overall survival.
resultsOf 1492 participants, 56% had resection with the kit and 44% without. Pathologic nodal staging quality was significantly higher in the kit cases: 0.2% of kit cases versus 9.8% of nonkit cases had no lymph nodes examined; 3.2% versus 25.3% had no mediastinal lymph nodes; 75% versus 26% attained the National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria (p < 0.0001 for all comparisons). Kit cases revealed no difference in perioperative complications or health care utilization except for significantly shorter duration of surgery, lower proportions with atelectasis, and slightly higher use of blood transfusion. Resection with the kit was associated with a lower hazard of death (crude, 0.78 [95% confidence interval: 0.61-0.99]; adjusted 0.85 [0.71-1.02]).
conclusionsLung cancer surgery with a lymph node collection kit significantly improved pathologic nodal staging quality, with a trend toward survival improvement, without excessive perioperative morbidity or mortality.
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.