ArticleThoracic cancer2021
Pathological high malignant grade is higher risk of recurrence in pN0M0 invasive lung adenocarcinoma, even with small invasive size.
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 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.
- [Advances in radiomics for early diagnosis and precision treatment of lung cancer].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2025Review
- Histologic grade and STAS as key predictors of distant recurrence in resected early-stage lung adenocarcinoma: a single-center study.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Sublobectomy and lymph node sampling are adequate for patients with invasive lung adenocarcinoma presenting as pure ground glass nodules.The clinical respiratory journal · 2024Article
- Pathological high malignant grade is higher risk of recurrence in pN0M0 invasive lung adenocarcinoma, even with small invasive size.Thoracic cancer · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTumor size is an absolute recurrence risk in lung cancer. Although morphological features also reflect recurrence risk, its significance among lower-risk cases characterized by small size is unknown. We aimed to evaluate the relationship between pathological invasive tumor size and morphological features, and their prognostic impact by considering them simultaneously in lung adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 563 pN0M0 patients with pathological invasive size of ≤40 mm. The patients were classified by pathological invasive size and pathological malignant grading using the proportion of subhistological components. The prognostic impact was evaluated using recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). The impact on prognosis was evaluated using uni- and multivariate analyses.
resultsThe proportion of histological grade changed according to invasive tumor size. Patients with high malignant grade (G3) showed worse RFS than those with low and intermediate malignant grade (G1+2) with invasive size ≤20 mm. The 5-year RFS (G1+2 vs. G3) in 5-10 mm was 96.0% vs. 83.3% (HR = 5.505, 95% CI = 7.156-1850, p < 0.001) and in 10-20 mm was 87.8% vs. 67.1% (HR = 2.829, 95% CI = 4.160-43.14, p < 0.001). G3 patients were significantly bigger in invasive size and included more pleural/lymphatic/vascular invasion and recurrence. Multivariate analysis indicated pathological G3 status was significantly associated with worse RFS (HR = 2.097, 95% CI = 1.320-3.333, p = 0.002).
conclusionsInvasive tumor size and pathological malignant grade overlap in invasive adenocarcinoma. G3 patients are more likely to have pleural/lymphatic/vascular invasion and significantly worse RFS compared to G1/G2 cases, even with a small invasive size of ≤20 mm.
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.