ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2024
Impact of lymph node dissection on the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in patients with postoperative recurrence of non-small cell lung cancer.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2024. 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.
- Review
- Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors for Microsatellite Instability High Unresectable Obstructive Colon Cancer: A Report of Two Cases.Surgical case reports · 2025Article
- Impact of the number of dissected lymph nodes on machine learning-based prediction of postoperative lung cancer recurrence: a single-hospital retrospective cohort study.BMJ open respiratory research · 2024Article
- Risk stratification scheme based on the TNM staging system for dogs with oral malignant melanoma centered on clinicopathologic presentation.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
- Effect of Pembrolizumab on Lymph Node Dissection in Patients Who Experienced Bladder Cancer Recurrence Following Radical Cystectomy.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The effect of lymph node dissection (LND) on the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to examine the difference in the effect of ICI between patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) according to the extent of LND performed in surgery prior to postoperative recurrence. Methods: A total of 134 patients with postoperative recurrence (surgery group, n=26) or unresectable advanced lung cancer (non-surgery group, n=108) who were treated with ICIs between January 2016 and December 2022 were included for analysis. In the surgery group, 16 patients underwent systematic LND, whereas the remaining 10 patients underwent selective LND. Progression-free survival with ICI treatment (ICI-PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between the surgery and non-surgery groups and between the systematic and selective LND groups using the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method to adjust for patient background characteristics. Results: In the IPTW-adjusted analysis, the 2-year PFS rate with ICI treatment was 31.2% in the surgery group and 27.3% in the non-surgery group (P=0.19); the corresponding 2-year OS rates were 69.6% and 62.2%, respectively (P=0.10). In the surgery group, the 2-year PFS rates under ICI were 20.0% in the systematic LND group and 45.7% in the selective LND group (P=0.03). Conclusions: IPTW-adjusted analysis indicated no difference in prognosis between patients with postoperative recurrence and those with advanced unresectable lung cancer. However, in patients with postoperative recurrence, the extent of LND was a significant predictor of ICI-PFS. These findings suggest that systematic LND may reduce the efficacy of ICI, indicating that preoperative ICI administration may be warranted.
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.