Observational studyMedicine2026
Direction of discordance between PET/CT, EBUS-TBNA, and multidisciplinary tumor board nodal assignment in non-small cell lung cancer: A retrospective observational study.
Observational study in Medicine, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mediastinal nodal classification in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) at the N0/N1-N2/N3 treatment-defining boundary guides therapeutic strategy and is commonly finalized in multidisciplinary tumor board (MDT) meetings. We compared positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) against MDT assignment and quantified discordance at this threshold. We retrospectively analyzed 114 consecutive NSCLC patients who underwent both PET/CT and EBUS-TBNA before MDT review. Nodal stage was dichotomized as N0/N1 vs N2/N3. Because the MDT decision incorporates both modalities, agreement with MDT is reported as observed agreement and Cohen κ together with the direction of discordance, rather than as sensitivity and specificity. In the subgroup with surgical mediastinal staging, both modalities and the MDT category were compared with histopathology. MDT assigned N2/N3 in 84 patients (73.7%). Relative to the MDT category, PET/CT over-classified 16 patients (14.0%) and under-classified 9 (7.9%). EBUS-TBNA under-classified 15 of the 43 patients it classified N0/N1 (34.9%), and under-classification persisted among the 25 patients in whom every sampled station was diagnostic (8/25, 32.0%); 12 of these 15 assignments rested on clinical-radiological course rather than histopathology. Agreement with the MDT category was 85.1% (κ = 0.662) for EBUS-TBNA and 78.1% (κ = 0.389) for PET/CT; because malignant cytology was definitional for the MDT category, 67 of 97 concordant EBUS-TBNA classifications (69.1%) were determined by that rule and do not measure EBUS-TBNA performance. Against surgical histopathology in 18 patients, PET/CT classified 11 of 13 pathologically N0 patients as N2/N3 (specificity 15.4%; 95% CI, 4.3-42.2) and EBUS-TBNA identified 2 of 5 with pathological N2 disease (sensitivity 40.0%; 95% CI, 11.8-76.9). At the treatment-defining nodal boundary, the two modalities diverged from the multidisciplinary decision in opposite directions: PET/CT over-classified nodal status, whereas EBUS-TBNA under-classified in approximately 1 in 3 patients it had assigned N0/N1, including those in whom sampling was complete, although most of these assignments rested on clinical course rather than tissue. These findings are consistent with guideline recommendations that PET-positive mediastinal nodes require tissue confirmation and that a negative endosonographic result be interpreted alongside pretest probability and station coverage.
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.