ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2026
Safety and pathologic response of neoadjuvant pulsed electric field ablation and systemic therapy in early-stage resectable lung cancer: case series.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05583188 (Neoadjuvant Soft Tissue Ablation Utilizing Aliya™ Pulsed Electric Fields With Systemic Therapy in Early-Stage Resectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer), which is not on this 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.
Neoadjuvant Soft Tissue Ablation Utilizing Aliya™ Pulsed Electric Fields With Systemic Therapy in Early-Stage Resectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC)
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The VIGOR study was designed to evaluate the pathologic response of soft tissue ablated with pulsed electric fields (PEFs) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who are candidates for surgical resection following standard of care (SOC) neoadjuvant use of checkpoint inhibitor treatment plus platinum doublet chemotherapy (NCT05583188). The safety of adding PEF to this pathway of care was also evaluated. The primary endpoint was the pathologic response. Secondary endpoints included the rate of R0 (complete) resection, as well as the frequency, duration, and causes of any surgery cancellations or delays. Exploratory endpoints included the profiling of circulating immunocytes post ablation by flow cytometry. The study enrolled 5 patients and PEF energy was successfully delivered to targeted lesions in the lung. No issues were observed when accessing the tumor for delivery of PEF energy, and no device-related serious adverse events (SAEs) were observed. All patients initiated neoadjuvant therapy as planned. Four of five patients underwent surgical resection. Pathological assessment was performed on resected tumors and revealed that out of the four surgical patients three were pathologic complete response (pCR) and one had major pathologic response (MPR). In summary, this study supports the safety and feasibility of PEF ablation in NSCLC patients prior to neoadjuvant treatment with immune checkpoint blockade plus platinum doublet chemotherapy and planned surgical 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.