ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2025
Comparison among stereotactic body radiation therapy, lobectomy, segmentectomy, and wedge resection for clinical stage I non-small cell lung cancer: a network meta-analysis.
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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Lung resections and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) are primary treatments for clinical stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The aim of this network meta-analysis is to compare the differences in effectiveness between SBRT and specific lung resections, including lobectomy, segmentectomy, and wedge resection for clinical stage I NSCLC. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and the ClinicalTrials.gov registry were searched. Random-effects model was conducted to assess differences in survival outcomes and treatment-related complication incidence between SBRT and three specific lung resections (lobectomy, segmentectomy, wedge resection). Subgroup analyses were performed according to clinical stages, regions, and publication years. Results: A total of 30 studies were enrolled for network meta-analysis. All three lung resections demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) compared with SBRT [lobectomy: hazard ratio (HR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval: 0.53-0.79; segmentectomy: HR 0.64, 95% confidence interval: 0.50-0.82); wedge resection: HR 0.72, 95% confidence interval: 0.55-0.93]. The recurrence-free survival (RFS) of patients in lobectomy and segmentectomy groups was significantly better than that of patients in the SBRT group, with no significant difference between the wedge resection and SBRT groups. Patients with clinical stage IA NSCLC showed no significant difference in OS between SBRT and three lung resections (lobectomy: HR 0.99, 95% confidence interval: 0.85-1.16; segmentectomy: HR 0.98, 95% confidence interval: 0.83-1.16; wedge resection: HR 1.71, 95% confidence interval: 0.91-3.26). Conclusions: For clinical stage I NSCLC patients, lobectomy and segmentectomy are superior to SBRT. Wedge resection is associated with similar RFS but better OS to SBRT. In clinical stage IA NSCLC, SBRT may provide comparable OS to lung resections.
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.