ArticleBMC cancer2026
A multicenter prediction model for false-positive clinical nodal disease in < 4-cm NSCLC: clinical implications for upfront surgery versus neoadjuvant therapy.
Article in BMC cancer, 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
backgroundPerioperative immunochemotherapy is recommended for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with ≥ 4-cm tumors or clinical nodal involvement (cN(+)). Therefore, accurate preoperative nodal assessment is crucial in < 4-cm tumors, where false-positive cN staging should be carefully considered. This multicenter study aimed to develop and validate a prediction model to identify patients at high risk of cN(+)pN(-) disease.
methodsThe development cohort included 251 patients with tumors < 4 cm who were diagnosed as cN(+) using positron emission tomography and underwent curative anatomical resection with mediastinal lymph node dissection between 2010 and 2020. The model predicting cN(+)pN(-) was developed and subsequently validated in a temporally independent validation cohort of 108 patients treated during periods different from those of the development cohort.
resultsIn the development cohort, 72 patients (28.7%) were cN(+)pN(-). In multivariable analysis, age ≥ 67 years (odds ratio [OR] 2.85, p = 0.004), right-sided tumor (OR 2.50, p = 0.006), carcinoembryonic antigen ≤ 12 ng/mL (OR 3.11, p = 0.048), cN1 (OR 2.37, p = 0.025), and tumor maximum standardized uptake value ≤ 6.5 (OR 2.03, p = 0.023) were independent predictors for cN(+)pN(-). The prediction model showed a C-index of 0.74 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-0.81), specificity of 94.4%, and positive predictive value (PPV) of 66.7% in the development cohort. In the validation cohort, the C-index was 0.77 (95% CI 0.67-0.86) with good calibration (slope, 1.002; intercept, 0.001), specificity (96.3%), and PPV (70.0%).
conclusionsIn patients with < 4-cm cN(+) NSCLC, a simple model based on five readily available preoperative factors can identify individuals at high risk of false-positive nodal staging with high specificity. This model may help identify patients in whom upfront surgery for definitive pathological nodal evaluation may be preferable rather than immediate neoadjuvant therapy.
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.