Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34000035›Full record

ArticleInteractive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery2021

Does anatomical location-based metastatic lymph node density affect prognosis in lung cancer patients?

Yunus Aksoy, Necati Çıtak, Çiğdem Obuz, Muzaffer Metin, Adnan Sayar

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. [Review for N2 Sub-staging in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer].Zhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer · 2022
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yunus AksoyThoracic Surgery, Yedikule Chest Diseases and Thoracic Surgery Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0003-4966-2809
Necati ÇıtakThoracic Surgery, Bakirkoy Dr Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Çiğdem ObuzThoracic Surgery, Yedikule Chest Diseases and Thoracic Surgery Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Muzaffer MetinThoracic Surgery, Yedikule Chest Diseases and Thoracic Surgery Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0003-0804-2654
Adnan SayarThoracic Surgery, Bakirkoy Dr Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Yedikule Teaching Hospital · TRBakırköy Dr.Sadi Konuk Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe newly proposed N subclassification (new-N) was compared with the combined anatomical location and ratio of the number of metastatic lymph nodes to the total number of resected lymph nodes (anatomic-LNR) in terms of prognosis in resected lung cancer patients.

methodsBetween 2005 and 2018, 961 patients who underwent lung cancer resection were catergorized into the pN1-single (N1a; n = 281), pN1-multiple (N1b; n = 182), pN2-single with skip metastasis (N2a1; n = 116), pN2-single with N1 metastasis (N2a2; n = 222) and pN2-multiple (N2b; n = 160) groups based on new-N. The optimal cut-off points for survival in pN1 and pN2 patients were determined using the best sensitivity and specificity scores, calculated using receiver operating characteristic analysis.

resultsThe difference in survival between N1a and N1b patients was statistically significant (P = 0.001), but there was no significant difference in the survival rates of N1b and N2a1 (P = 0.52). The survival curves for N2a1 and N2a2 patients almost overlapped (P = 0.143). N2a2 patients showed a better survival rate than N2b patients, with no significant difference (P = 0.132). The cut-off points for LNR were 0.10 and 0.25 for pN1 and pN2 patients, respectively, according to receiver operating characteristic analysis for survival. Based on receiver operating characteristic analysis, pN patients were categorized into the N1-lowLNR (n = 232), N1-highLNR (n = 231), N2-lowLNR (n = 266) and N2-highLNR (n = 232) groups. The 5-year survival rate was 62.9%, 49.8%, 41.1% and 27.1% for N1-lowLNR, N1-highLNR, N2-lowLNR and N2-highLNR, respectively (P < 0.001).

conclusionsLowLNR is associated with better survival than highLNR in resected lung cancer patients. Anatomic-LNR shows a high discriminatory power for prognosis.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungLung NeoplasmsHumansLymph NodesNeoplasm StagingPrognosisRetrospective StudiesLymph node ratioNodal classificationNon-small cell lung cancerPrognosis

Identifiers

PMID34000035
PMCPMC8691707
OpenAlexW3162425084

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.