ArticleJapanese journal of radiology2025
Qualitative and quantitative CT analyses of the solid component in lung adenocarcinoma for predicting invasiveness.
Article in Japanese journal of radiology, 2025. 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.
- A radiomics-based nomogram for preoperatively predicting the invasiveness of nodular lung adenocarcinoma: a multicenter study.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Article
- Diagnostic accuracy of computer-aided detection (CAD)-derived solid component proportion and mean CT attenuation for predicting invasiveness in pulmonary part-solid nodules: a retrospective study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to evaluate the CT findings of lung adenocarcinoma with solid components and to determine the difference between adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) and minimally invasive adenocarcinoma (MIA) with invasive adenocarcinoma (IAC). MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 54 cases were included in this study. The diagnoses of lung adenocarcinoma consisted of AIS or MIA (n = 20) and IAC (n = 34). The following factors were evaluated on CT images: part-solid nodule or solid nodule, presence of air bronchogram, air space, calcification within the tumor, presence of interstitial pneumonia and emphysema, diameters of the tumor and solid component, and CT values of the solid component. The volume and CT number histograms, including the 50th, 75th, and 100th percentiles of solid component were obtained using a software program. The CT criteria were compared between AIS, MIA, and IAC, and an indicator of differentiation was considered.
resultsPart-solid nodules were observed more frequently in AIS and MIA (85.0%) than in IAC (55.9%). All criteria for quantitative analysis showed significant differences between AIS or MIA and IAC, and the diameter of the solid component in the mediastinal window was an indicator of differentiation (p = 0.0006; odds ratio, 1.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-1.8).
conclusionThe diameter of the solid component on the mediastinal window was considered an indicator of differentiation between AIS, MIA, and IAC. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: Quantitative data of solid component, including both manual measurements and evaluation using CT software, are correlated with pathological invasiveness. Diameter of the solid component in the mediastinal window would be an indicator of IAC.
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.