ArticleCancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.)2022
Verification of the eighth edition of the UICC-TNM classification on surgically resected lung adenocarcinoma: Comparison with previous classification in a local center.
Article in Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.), 2022. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Targeting TROP-2 in treatment-resistant non-small cell lung cancer harboring theOncology letters · 2026Article
- Intratumoral heterogeneity score enhances invasiveness prediction in pulmonary ground-glass nodules via stacking ensemble machine learning.Insights into imaging · 2025Article
- Molecular targets and mechanisms of cortex mori for lung cancer treatment: a network pharmacology study, molecular docking andFrontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Verification of the eighth edition of the UICC-TNM classification on surgically resected lung adenocarcinoma: Comparison with previous classification in a local center.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2022Article
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
backgroundThe UICC 8th TNM classification of lung cancer has been changed dramatically, especially in measuring methods of T-desriptors. Different from squamous- or small-cell carcinomas, in which the solid- and the invasive-diameter mostly agree with each other, the diameter of the radiological solid part and that of pathological invasive part in adenocarcinomas often does not match.
aimWe aimed to determine radiological and pathological tumor diameters of pulmonary adenocarcinomas with clinicopathological factors and evaluate the validity of the 8th edition in comparison with the 7th edition. METHODS AND
resultsWe retrospectively analyzed clinicopathological factors of 429 patients with surgically resected pulmonary adenocarcinomas. The maximum tumor and their solid-part diameters were measured using thin-sectioned computed tomography and compared with pathological tumor and invasive diameters. Overall survival (OS) rate was determined using the Kaplan-Meier method for different subgroups of clinicopathological factors. Akaike's information criteria (AIC) was used as a discriminative measure for the univariate Cox model for the 7th and 8th editions. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed to explore independent prognostic factors. Correlation coefficients between radiological and pathological diameters in the 7th and 8th editions were 0.911 and 0.888, respectively, without a significant difference. The major reasons for the difference in the 8th edition were the presence of intratumoral fibrosis and papillary growth pattern. The weighted kappa coefficients in the 8th edition were superior those in the 7th edition for both the T and Stage classifications. In the univariate Cox model, AIC levels were the lowest in the 8th edition. Multivariate analysis revealed that age, lymphovascular invasion, pT(8th), and stage were the most important determinants for OS.
conclusionThe UICC 8th edition is a more discriminative classification than the 7th edition. For subsolid nodules, continuous efforts are necessary to increase the universality of the measurement of solid and invasive diameters.
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.