ArticleJTCVS open2026
Sublobar resection is the preferred surgical strategy for clinical stage IA lung cancers presenting as subsolid nodule.
Article in JTCVS open, 2026. 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Lung cancer presenting as subsolid lesions has been described as less aggressive than solid lung cancers. Thus, lobectomy for subsolid lesions may be an overly extensive resection compared with sublobar techniques. The objective of the current study was to compare oncological differences between patients receiving lobectomy and sublobar resection for lung cancers presenting as subsolid lesions less than 3 cm. Methods: A retrospective review of prospectively maintained databases from the International Early Lung Cancer Action Program, Initiative for Early Lung Cancer Research on Treatment, and Weill Cornell Medicine was conducted to identify lung cancers presenting as subsolid lesions treated with surgical resection. Solid lung cancers and nodules greater than 3 cm were excluded. Computed tomography imaging was used to determine the size of nodule and percent solid component. The primary outcome of interest was lung cancer-specific survival. The secondary outcomes of interest included disease-free survival and overall survival. Median duration from surgery to outcome or last follow-up was 57.7 months (interquartile range, 30.1-111.5 months). Results: A total of 624 patients were identified and divided into 2 groups based on extent of resection: Group A underwent lobectomy (320 patients), and group B underwent sublobar resection (304 patients). Of patients undergoing sublobar resection, 61% (185) underwent wedge resection and 39% (119) underwent segmentectomy. Nodules were further stratified by percent solid component (nonsolid, <25% solid, 25%-49% solid, >50% solid). Sixteen patients (2.56%) of the entire study population developed recurrence, and 2 patients (0.3%) had died of lung cancer. At the end of follow-up, lung cancer-specific survival was 100% in group A and 98.2% in group B (95.2-100.0) (log-rank, Conclusions: In this large cohort of patients with lung cancers presenting as subsolid nodules less than 3 cm, lung cancer-specific survival was excellent and similar between lobectomy and sublobar resection. Disease-free survival was worse for patients with tumors greater than 2 cm treated with sublobar resection.
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.