ArticleThoracic cancer2024
Is there a prognostic difference among stage I lung adenocarcinoma patients with different BRAF-mutation status?
Article in Thoracic cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Osalmid inhibits lung adenocarcinoma progression and enhances EGFR-TKI responses: a preclinical and translational study.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Article
- Clinically relevant somatic variants and genomic discordance between primary tumors and mediastinal lymph nodes in lung adenocarcinoma.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2026Article
- Is there a prognostic difference among stage I lung adenocarcinoma patients with different BRAF-mutation status?Thoracic cancer · 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
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe data of the prognostic role of V-Raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1 (BRAF) mutations in early-stage lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) patients is scarce. This study aimed to investigate the proportion, clinicopathological features, and prognostic significance of patients with stage I LUAD carrying BRAF mutations.
methodsWe collected 431 patients with pathological stage I LUAD from cBioPortal for Cancer Genomics and 1604 LUAD patients tested for BRAF V600E and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations from Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital. Survival curves were drawn by the Kaplan-Meier method and compared by log-rank test. Cox proportional hazard models, propensity-score matching (PSM), and overlap weighting (OW) were performed in this study. The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival (RFS).
resultsThe proportion of BRAF mutations was estimated at 5.6% in a Caucasian cohort. BRAF V600E mutations were detected in six (1.4%) patients in Caucasian populations and 16 (1.0%) patients in Chinese populations. Two BRAF V600E-mutant patients were detected to have concurrent EGFR mutations, one for 19-del and one for L858R. For pathological stage I LUAD patients, BRAF mutations were not significantly associated with worse RFS than wild-type BRAF patients (HR = 1.111; p = 0.885). After PSM and OW, similar results were presented (HR = 1.352; p = 0.742 and HR = 1.246; p = 0.764, respectively). BRAF V600E mutation status also lacked predictive significance for RFS (HR, 1.844; p = 0.226; HR = 1.144; p = 0.831 and HR = 1.466; p = 0.450, respectively).
conclusionsIn this study, we demonstrated that BRAF status may not be capable of predicting prognosis in stage I LUAD patients. There is a need for more data to validate our findings.
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.