ArticleJournal of cardiothoracic surgery2025
Prognosis of non-small cell lung cancer patients undergoing compromised wedge vs. segmental resection: a population-based cohort study.
Article in Journal of cardiothoracic surgery, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSublobar resection (SLR), which includes wedge resection (WR) and segmental resection (SR), is often considered a compromised procedure for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who have limited pulmonary reserve or other conditions that cannot tolerate lobectomy. This study intends to evaluate and compare the results of WR and SR on overall survival (OS) in patients undergoing compromised SLR.
methodsData from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database was analyzed, identifing 2,047 patients with pathological stage (pStage) IB-IIIB NSCLC who underwent compromised SLR, including WR and SR. The two treatment groups' potential baseline differences were balanced using propensity score matching (PSM). Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to determine the impact of procedures on OS before PSM. Kaplan-Meier (KM) analysis calculated survival curves and compared OS across groups before and after PSM. Subgroup analysis investigated the influence of surgical procedures on OS within specific patient subgroups after PSM. Additionally, a sensitivity analysis focusing on patients with T1 and T2 stages was performed after PSM to validate the robustness of the results.
resultsOverall, 421 patients (20.57%) underwent SR. In univariate analysis, SR was associated with improved OS as compared to WR (HR = 0.85; 95% CI: 0.75-0.97; P = 0.02). Nevertheless, the association did not last in the multivariate analysis (HR = 0.94; 95% CI: 0.82-1.07; P = 0.32). Following PSM, KM analysis also revealed no significant difference in OS (P = 0.21). A subgroup analysis revealed that SR provided a marginal improvement in OS for patients under the age of 60. However, this impact was only borderline statistically significant (HR = 0.49; 95% CI: 0.23-1.03; P = 0.059), and no relevant link was observed in other groups. Additionally, a sensitivity analysis demonstrated no significant association between SR and OS (HR = 0.91; 95% CI: 0.73-1.13; P = 0.39).
conclusionsThe benefit of SR over WR in compromised SLR for NSCLC patients may be limited. Further studies are necessary to clarify the optimal surgical approach for different patient subgroups.
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.