ArticleTranslational cancer research2020
Comparison of treatment strategies for patients with limited-stage small cell lung cancer who received chemotherapy.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2020. 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.
- Comprehensive analysis of prognostic predictors for patients with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer who underwent resection followed by adjuvant chemotherapy.Annals of translational medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe standard care for limited-stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is unclear. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcome for patients receiving chemotherapy alone, chemotherapy plus surgery (CS), chemotherapy plus radiation (CR), or chemotherapy plus surgery and radiation (CSR) for limited-stage SCLC.
methodsPatients with T1-4N0-2M0 SCLC who received chemotherapy from 2004 to 2014 were retrieved from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. The overall survival (OS) of these patients, stratified by different stage, was compared in accordance to the method of receiving different treatments using Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analysis.
resultsA total of 7,204 patients were included, where 1,347 (18.7%) patients received chemotherapy alone, 296 (4.1%) undergone CS, 5,296 (73.5%) patients were subjected to CR and 267 (3.7%) patients were managed by the three combination of CSR. Chemotherapy alone was associated with the worst survival in comparison to the other two method of combination i.e., chemotherapy with radiation or surgery. When compared with CR, CS had no survival benefit in patients with stage in excess of T1-2N0 disease, but was associated with improved 5-year OS in patients with T1-2N0 disease, which ranged from 29.1% to 54.3% (P<0.001). For patients with T1-2N2 disease who received CSR demonstrated superior OS over those who received CR (P=0.004) or CS (P=0.036). Cox regression analysis showed CS was associated with improved OS when compared with CR in patients with N0 disease (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.43-0.68; P=0.000) and CSR was associated with better OS in comparison with CR in patients with N2 disease (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.55-0.93; P=0.013).
conclusionsPatients with limited-stage SCLC can benefit from local treatment such as surgery, radiation, and surgery plus radiation. For patients with N0 disease, CS was associated with improved survival in comparison to CR. If N2 was identified after surgery, radiation may be added to improve OS.
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.