ArticleCancer research and treatment2025
Histological Assessment and Interobserver Agreement in Major Pathologic Response for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer with Neoadjuvant Therapy.
Article in Cancer research and treatment, 2025. 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.
- Standardizing pCR/MPR Assessment in NSCLC After Neoadjuvant Therapy: Challenges and Perspectives.Cancers · 2026Review
- Pathological response and tumor regression grading following neoadjuvant chemo-immunotherapy and chemotherapy in resectable non-small cell lung cancer.Oncology letters · 2026Article
- Neoadjuvant immunotherapy for lung cancer: current limitations and future prospects.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Reframing tumor bed evaluation in non-small cell lung cancer: histopathological challenges and future directions in the era of neoadjuvant immunotherapy.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
- A narrative review of pathologic response in non-small cell lung cancer: challenges, implications, and future directions.Translational lung cancer research · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeMajor pathologic response (MPR), defined as ≤ 10% of residual viable tumor (VT), is a prognostic factor in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after neoadjuvant therapy. This study evaluated interobserver reproducibility in assessing MPR, compared area-weighted and unweighted VT (%) calculation, and determined optimal VT (%) cutoffs across histologic subtypes for survival prediction. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis retrospective study included 108 patients with NSCLC who underwent surgical resection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiation at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital between 2009-2018. Three observers with varying expertise independently assessed tumor bed and VT (%) based on digital whole-slide images.
resultsReproducibility in tumor bed delineation was reduced in squamous cell carcinoma (SqCC) with smaller tumor bed, although overall concordance was high (Dice coefficient, 0.96; intersection-over-union score, 0.92). Excellent agreement was achieved for VT (%) (intraclass correlation coefficient=0.959) and MPR using 10% cutoff (Fleiss' kappa=0.911). Shifting between area-weighted and unweighted VT (%) showed only one case differing in MPR status out of 81 cases. The optimal cutoff was 10% for both adenocarcinoma (ADC) and SqCC. MPR+ was observed in 18 patients (17%), with SqCC showing higher MPR+ rates (p=0.044), lower VT (%) (p < 0.001), and better event-free survival (p=0.015) than ADC. MPR+ significantly improved overall survival (p=0.023), event-free survival (p=0.001), and lung cancer-specific survival (p=0.012).
conclusionWhile MPR assessment demonstrated robust reproducibility with minimal impact from the tumor bed, attention is warranted when evaluating smaller tumor beds in SqCC. A 10% cutoff reliably predicted survival across histologic subtypes with higher interobserver reproducibility.
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.