ArticleTurk gogus kalp damar cerrahisi dergisi2022
Comparative evaluation of staging algorithms proven N2 non-small cell lung cancer treated by lung resection after neoadjuvant therapy.
Article in Turk gogus kalp damar cerrahisi dergisi, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In this study, we aimed to compare the performances of clinical methods, minimally invasive methods, mediastinoscopy, and re-mediastinoscopy used in the restaging of patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy for pathologically proven N2. Our secondary objective was to determine the most optimal algorithm for initial staging and restaging after neoadjuvant therapy. Methods: Between April 2003 and August 2017, a total of 105 patients (99 males, 6 females; mean age: 54.5±8.2 years; range, 27 to 73 years) who were diagnosed with pathologically proven Stage 3A-B N2 non-small cell lung cancer and received neoadjuvant therapy and subsequently lung resection were retrospectively analyzed. Staging algorithm groups (Group 1=first mediastinoscopy-second clinic, Group 2=first mediastinoscopy-second minimally invasive, Group 3=first mediastinoscopy-second re-mediastinoscopy, and Group 4=first minimally invasive-second mediastinoscopy) were created and compared. Results: In the first stage, N2 diagnosis was made in 90 patients by mediastinoscopy and in 15 patients by minimally invasive method. In the second stage, 44 patients were restaged by the clinical method, 23 by the minimally invasive method, 23 by re-mediastinoscopy, and 15 by mediastinoscopy. The false negativity rates of Groups 1, 2, 3, and 4 were 27.2%, 26.1%, 21.8%, and 13.3%, respectively. The most reliable staging algorithm was found to be the minimally invasive method in the first step and mediastinoscopy in the second step. The mean overall five-year survival rate was 46.3±4.4%, and downstaging in lymph node involvement was found to have a favorable effect on survival (54.3% vs. 21.8%, respectively; p=0.003). Conclusion: The staging method to be chosen before and after neoadjuvant therapy is critical in the treatment of Stage 3A-B N2 non-small cell lung cancer. In re-mediastinoscopy, the rate of false negativity increases due to technical difficulties and insufficient sampling. As the most optimal staging algorithm, the minimally invasive method is recommended in the first step and mediastinoscopy in the second step.
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.