ArticleClinical lung cancer2024
Barriers to Timely Lung Cancer Care in Early Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and Impact on Patient Outcomes.
Article in Clinical lung cancer, 2024. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oncologic outcomes after declining lung cancer surgery: mixed methods analysis of a prospective pilot cohort.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOptimal time to treatment for early-stage lung cancer is uncertain. We examined causes of delays in care for Veterans who presented with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and whether workup time was associated with increased upstaging or all-cause mortality.
methodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of Veterans referred to our facility with radiographic stage I or II NSCLC between January 2013 to December 2017, with follow-up through October 2021. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, time intervals of care, and reasons for delays were collected. Guideline concordance (GC) was defined as treatment within 14 weeks of abnormal image. Multivariable analyses were performed to determine association between delays in care, survival, and upstaging.
resultsData from 203 Veterans were analyzed. Median time between abnormal imaging to treatment was 17.7 weeks (IQR 12.7-26.6). Only 33% of Veterans received GC care. Most common patient-related delays were: intercurrent hospitalization/comorbidity (23%), no-shows (16%) and inability to reach Veteran (17%). Most common system-related delay: lack of scheduling availability (25%). Delays associated with upstaging: transportation issues, request for coordination of appointments, and unforeseen appointment changes. Rates of upstaging did not differ between GC and discordant groups (P = .6). GC care was not an independent predictor of mortality. Post-hoc, treatment within 8 weeks was associated with lower rates of upstaging (P = .05).
conclusionAlthough GC care did not impact survival or upstaging for early-stage NSCLC, shorter timeframes may be beneficial. Modifiable delays in care exist which may be addressed at an institutional level to improve timeliness of care.
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.