ArticleGeneral thoracic and cardiovascular surgery2025
Development and internal validation of predictive models for spread through air spaces in clinical stage IA lung adenocarcinoma.
Article in General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveSpread through air spaces (STAS) in lung adenocarcinoma impacted prognosis and treatment decisions, but lacked reliable preoperative prediction. We aimed to construct an easy-to-use model for clinical stage IA adenocarcinoma patients.
methodsThis study analyzed 1212 patients with clinical stage IA lung adenocarcinoma undergoing lung resections from November 2020 to January 2022. Two logistic regression models were developed. Model 1 used demographic and computed tomography features, and Model 2 incorporated maximum standardized uptake values additionally. Internal validation used tenfold cross-validation. Model discrimination and calibration were described by the area under the curve (AUC) and Spiegelhalter z test, respectively.
resultsPrevalence of STAS was 10.6%. Model 1 consisted of maximum tumor diameter, smoking history, location, spiculation and lobulation, showing moderate discrimination (AUC = 0.700). Model 2 consisted of smoking history, the maximum standardized uptake value, spiculation and lobulation, receiving an AUC of 0.807 and good calibration. Model 2 has a sensitivity and a specificity of 0.857 and 0.652. A nomogram for Model 2 was also developed.
conclusionOur study developed and validated two predictive models for STAS for clinical stage IA lung adenocarcinoma. Model 2, integrating maximum standardized uptake value, outperformed Model 1 and offered a more comprehensive approach to predicting STAS. Surgeon could consider the results of Model 2 and intraoperative frozen sections sequentially to optimize surgical strategies. External validation remained warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40293570What 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.