ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2025
Proper clinical and pathologic T stage among diverse T descriptors in terms of recurrence after curative surgery for stage I lung adenocarcinoma.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The clinical and pathologic T stage was revised for part-solid nodules in lung adenocarcinoma based on accumulating data. However, there are diverse clinical and pathologic T descriptors; therefore, this study aimed to investigate which T descriptors are the most appropriate for the clinical and pathologic T stage in terms of prognosis after curative surgery for stage I lung adenocarcinoma. Methods: A total of 951 patients who underwent curative resection for pathologic stage I lung adenocarcinoma were reviewed. Two independent clinicians measured the total and solid sizes on lung and mediastinal window settings. The nonlepidic size was calculated from the pathologic report for invasive size. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted using each T descriptor for prognostic role identification. Results: The median age was 64 years (range, 25-86 years). Ground glass opacity (GGO) was present in 599 patients (63%). The median total tumor size and solid size in the lung window setting were 2 cm (range, 0.6-6.8 cm) and 1.3 cm (range, 0-5.5 cm), respectively. The median tumor size in the mediastinal window setting was 0.95 cm (range, 0-5.5 cm). Our multivariate analysis revealed that the solid size in the lung window setting (P=0.02) and the tumor size in the mediastinal window setting (P=0.02) were significantly associated with recurrence. The median total pathologic tumor size was 1.9 cm (range, 0.3-4 cm), the median nonlepidic tumor size 1 (NLTS1) was 1.12 cm (range, 0-4 cm), and the median nonlepidic size without fibrosis [nonlepidic tumor size 2 (NLTS2)] was 0.8 cm (range, 0-3.8 cm). NLTS1 (P=0.048) and NLTS2 (P=0.02) were significant predictors of recurrence in the multivariate analysis. However, 526 (55.3%) and 501 (52.8%) patients were stage 1A1 by the mediastinal window setting and NLTS2. Conclusions: For stage I lung adenocarcinoma, in terms of the stage, the solid component on the lung window setting is a more suitable and reliable clinical T descriptor, and the nonlepidic size (NLTS1) is considered a more appropriate model for the pathologic T descriptor.
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.