ArticleJTO clinical and research reports2021
Discrimination Between Primary Lung Cancer and Lung Metastases by Genomic Profiling.
Article in JTO clinical and research reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dynamic single-cell landscape reveals a T-cell-suppressed microenvironment and a conserved neutrophil program in the lung metastatic niche.Genes & diseases · 2026Article
- Retrospective Analysis Comparing Lung-RADS v2022 and British Thoracic Society Guidelines for Differentiating Lung Metastases from Primary Lung Cancer.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Non-small-cell lung cancer.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2024Review
- Smoking, Lung Cancer Stage, and Prognostic Factors-Findings from the National Lung Screening Trial.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Long-Term Care and Follow-Up in Laryngeal Cancer Patients: A Multicenter Retrospective Analysis.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- The Diagnostic Utility of Cell-Free DNA from Ex Vivo Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid in Lung Cancer.Cancers · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn cases of lung tumors that occur after treatment for malignancies in other organs, the tumor may represent either a primary lung cancer or a solitary pulmonary metastasis from the other tumor. Because some lung tumors are difficult to differentiate on the basis of imaging and pathologic findings, treatment selection is often difficult. In this study, we attempted to make a genomic diagnosis of primary and metastatic lung tumors by analyzing tumor samples using next-generation sequencing and evaluated the efficacy and validity of the genomic diagnosis.
methodsA total of 24 patients with a solitary lung nodule and a history of other malignancies were enrolled in this study. Tumor cells were selected from tissue samples using laser capture microdissection. DNA was extracted from those cells and subjected to targeted deep sequencing of 53 genes.
resultsThe driver mutation profiles of the primary lung tumors were discordant from those of the primary tumors in other sites, whereas the mutation profiles of pulmonary metastases and previous malignancies were concordant. In all 24 patients, we could diagnose either primary lung cancer (six patients) or lung metastases (18 patients) on the basis of whether gene mutation profiles were concordant or discordant. In 12 patients (50.0%), discrepancies were observed between the genomic and clinical or histopathologic diagnoses.
conclusionsIn patients with a solitary lung lesion and a history of cancer, tumor-specific mutations can serve as clonal markers, affording a more accurate understanding of the pathological condition and thus possibly improving both treatment selection and patient outcome.
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.