ArticleThoracic cancer2024
Factors affecting accuracy of clinical staging in resectable non-small cell lung cancer in a real-world study.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical Versus Pathologic Staging in Early-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Assessed by an Established Lung Cancer Multidisciplinary Meeting.Thoracic cancer · 2026Article
- Factors affecting accuracy of clinical staging in resectable non-small cell lung cancer in a real-world study.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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe clinical staging of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is well known to be related to their prognosis. However, there is usually a discrepancy between clinical staging and pathological staging. There are few analyses of clinical staging accuracy in patients with NSCLC. We compared the concordance rate between clinical and pathological staging of NSCLC and evaluated factors affecting the accuracy in real-world data.
methodsAltogether, 811 patients with primary NSCLC who had undergone curative lung resection surgery in Severance Hospital from January 2019 to December 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. We used the eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM staging.
resultsAmong 811 patients, endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) and positron emission tomography (PET-CT) were performed in 31.6% and 96.7%, respectively. The concordance rates between clinical and pathological TNM staging, T factor, and N factor, were 68.7%, 77.7%, and 85.8%, respectively. With multivariable logistic regression analysis, current smokers (OR 0.49; 95% CI: 0.32-0.76, p = 0.001) and a higher clinical stage (p < 0.001) contributed to the clinical staging inaccuracy. Additionally, the presence of a bronchoscopy specialist was significantly associated with clinical staging accuracy (OR 1.53; 95% CI: 1.10-2.13, p = 0.011).
conclusionClinical staging accuracy in NSCLC improved compared to before the widespread use of PET-CT and EBUS in clinical staging work-up. Smoking history and absence of expert bronchoscopy specialists showed a meaningful correlation with the inaccuracy of clinical staging. Thus, training more bronchoscopy experts would improve the staging accuracy of NSCLC, which could positively affect the prognosis of 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.