ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2021
Differential outcomes of residual disease in surgically-resected non-small cell lung cancer and the importance of guideline-concordant adjuvant therapy.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
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
Abstract
backgroundPositive mediastinal lymph nodes, a marker for systemic disease, and positive margins, a marker for local disease, following resection of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are forms of residual disease. The objective of this study is to compare survival of patients with residual disease and to study the effect of receipt of guideline vs. non-guideline concordant care.
methodsThe National Cancer Database (NCDB) was used to identify patients who underwent treatment naïve surgical resection with clinical stage T1-3N0-1M0 NSCLC between 2006-2016 and had pN2 disease, positive surgical margins, or both. Concordant care was determined based on form of chemotherapy and radiation, dosage, volume, modality, and duration. Kaplan-Meier survival curves and log-rank tests were used to compare five-year survival. Multivariable analysis using Cox proportional hazards modeling identified factors that contributed to worse overall survival.
resultsThere were 8,189 patients included: pN2 (5,416), positive margins (2,386), and both (387). Five-year survival rates for all patients were pN2 (35.8%), positive margins (33.9%), and both (22.9%) (P<0.0001). On multivariable analysis, positive margins were an independent predictor of better survival relative to pN2 disease (HR =0.729, CI: 0.676, 0.787, P<0.0001). Receipt of non-guideline concordant treatment was an independent predictor of worse survival compared to receipt of guideline-concordant treatment (HR =1.61, CI: 1.504, 1.725, P<0.0001).
conclusionsIn upfront surgical patients, guideline-concordant treatment in the setting of residual disease is associated with better overall survival compared with non-guideline concordant treatment. Pathologic N2 disease is associated with a lower survival rate than positive resection margins, possibly reflecting the systemic nature of pN2 disease.
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.