ArticleBMC medical imaging2024
Clinical and CT characteristics for predicting lymph node metastasis in patients with synchronous multiple primary lung adenocarcinoma.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aims to investigate the risk factors for lymph node metastasis (LNM) in synchronous multiple primary lung cancer (sMPLC) using clinical and CT features, and to offer guidance for preoperative LNM prediction and lymph node (LN) resection strategy. MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data and CT features of patients diagnosed with sMPLC at the Third Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2022. Patients were classified into two groups: the LNM group and the non-LNM (n-LNM) group. The study utilized univariate analysis to examine the disparities in clinical data and CT features between the two groups. Additionally, multivariate analysis was employed to discover the independent risk variables for LNM. The diagnostic efficacy of various parameters was evaluated using the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.
resultsAmong the 688 patients included in this study, 59 exhibited LNM. Univariate analysis revealed significant differences between the LNM and n-LNM groups in terms of gender, smoking history, CYFRA21-1 level, CEA level, NSE level, lesion type, total lesion diameter, main lesion diameter, spiculation sign, lobulation sign, cavity sign, and pleural traction sign. Logistic regression identified CEA level (OR = 1.042, 95%CI: 1.009-1.075), lesion type (OR = 9.683, 95%CI: 3.485-26.902), and main lesion diameter (OR = 1.677, 95%CI: 1.347-2.089) as independent predictors of LNM. The regression equation for the joint prediction was as follows: logit(p)= -7.569+0.041*CEA level +2.270* lesion type +0.517* main lesion diameter.ROC curve analysis showed that the AUC for CEA level was 0.765 (95% CI, 0.694-0.836), for lesion type was 0.794 (95% CI, 0.751-0.838), for main lesion diameter was 0.830 (95% CI, 0.784-0.875), and for the combine predict model was 0.895 (95% CI, 0.863-0.928).
conclusionThe combination of clinical and imaging features can better predict the status of LNM of sMPLC, and the prediction efficiency is significantly higher than that of each factor alone, and can provide a basis for lymph node management decision.
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.