ArticleJournal of radiation research2022
Propensity score-based analysis of stereotactic body radiotherapy, lobectomy and sublobar resection for stage I non-small cell lung cancer.
Article in Journal of radiation research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intra-respiratory variation in tumour-diaphragm geometric association as a potential surrogate for dynamic tumour-tracking radiotherapy.Physics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026Article
- Stereotactic body radiotherapy for central non-small cell lung cancer: risk analysis of radiation pneumonitis and bronchial dose constraints.Journal of radiation research · 2025Article
- Review
- Recent developments in the field of radiotherapy for the management of lung cancer.Japanese journal of radiology · 2025Review
- Histology-driven hypofractionated radiation therapy schemes for early-stage lung adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma.Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We applied two propensity score-based analyses to simultaneously compare three treatment modalities-stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), lobectomy, or sublobar resection (SLR)-for stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with the aim of clarifying the average treatment effect (ATE) and formulating a risk-adapted approach to treatment selection. A retrospective review of 823 patients aged ≥65 years who underwent SBRT, lobectomy, or SLR for stage I NSCLC was conducted. The following two analyses using machine learning-based propensity scores were performed: (i) propensity score weighting (PSW) to assess the ATE in the entire cohort, and (ii) propensity score subclassification (PSS) to evaluate treatment effects of subgroups. PSW showed no significant difference in the 5-year overall survival (OS) between SBRT and SLR (60.0% vs 61.2%; P = 0.70) and significant difference between SBRT and lobectomy (60.0% vs 77.6%; P = 0.026). Local (LR) and distant recurrence (DR) rates were significantly lower in lobectomy than in SBRT, whereas there was no significant difference between SBRT and SLR. PSS identified four subgroups with different patient characteristics: lobectomy-oriented (5-year cumulative incidences of non-lung cancer death, 7.5%), SLR-oriented (14.2%), SBRT-oriented (23.8%) and treatment-neutral subgroups (16.1%). Each subgroup showed different survival trends regarding the three treatments. The ATE of SBRT was not significantly different from that of SLR, but it was inferior to lobectomy. Four subgroups with different risks of non-lung cancer death and different survival trends for each treatment were identified. These would help decision-making for patients with stage I NSCLC.
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.