ReviewJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2023
Risk profiles and a concise prediction model for lymph node metastasis in patients with lung adenocarcinoma.
Review in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2023. 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.
- Article
- Spatial features of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in primary lesions of lung adenocarcinoma predict lymph node metastasis.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Predictors of occult lymph node metastasis in clinical T1 lung adenocarcinoma: a retrospective dual-center study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2025Article
- Lymph node or lymphoid aggregate? Impact on cancer resection quality, clinical prognosis, and tumor staging.Histology and histopathology · 2025Review
- Preoperative prediction of occult lymph node metastasis in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a simple and widely applicable model.BMC pulmonary medicine · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLung cancer is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer and ranks the first in mortality. Pathological lymph node status(pN) of lung cancer affects the treatment strategy after surgery while systematic lymph node dissection(SLND) is always unsatisfied.
methodsWe reviewed the clinicopathological features of 2,696 patients with LUAD and one single lesion ≤ 5 cm who underwent SLND in addition to lung resection at the Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center. The relationship between the pN status and all other clinicopathological features was assessed. All participants were stochastically divided into development and validation cohorts; the former was used to establish a logistic regression model based on selected factors from stepwise backward algorithm to predict pN status. C-statistics, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were calculated for both cohorts to test the model performance.
resultsNerve tract infiltration (NTI), visceral pleural infiltration (PI), lymphovascular infiltration (LVI), right upper lobe (RUL), low differentiated component, tumor size, micropapillary component, lepidic component, and micropapillary predominance were included in the final model. Model performance in the development and validation cohorts was as follows: 0.861 (95% CI: 0.842-0.883) and 0.840 (95% CI: 0.804-0.876) for the C-statistics and 0.803 (95% CI: 0.784-0.821) and 0.785 (95% CI: 0.755-0.814) for accuracy, and 0.754 (95% CI: 0.706-0.798) and 0.686 (95% CI: 0.607-0.757) for sensitivity and 0.814 (95% CI: 0.794-0.833) and 0.811 (95% CI: 0.778-0.841) for specificity, respectively.
conclusionOur study showed an easy and credible tool with good performance in predicting pN in patients with LUAD with a single tumor ≤ 5.0 cm without SLND and it is valuable to adjust the treatment strategy.
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.