ReviewTranslational lung cancer research2026
Vietnamese expert consensus on the diagnosis and multidisciplinary management of resectable non-small cell lung cancer.
Review in Translational lung cancer research, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The management of resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has evolved rapidly from a surgery-centered approach toward biomarker-informed, multimodality care integrating staging, pathology, surgery, perioperative systemic treatment, and postoperative surveillance. In Vietnam, implementation remains heterogeneous across institutions, particularly in access to fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT), invasive mediastinal staging, molecular testing, perioperative therapy, pathology standardization, and multidisciplinary review. This project aimed to develop a Vietnamese multidisciplinary expert consensus to contextualize contemporary international evidence for clinical practice in Vietnam. Methods: A structured, modified Delphi-informed consensus process was conducted in Vietnam between August 2025 and January 2026. The workflow comprised seven stages: scoping; a baseline practice survey; initial draft development; expert review of parts 1 and 2; post-meeting written feedback, revision, electronic recirculation, and formal voting for these sections; a multidisciplinary consensus meeting and formal voting for parts 3 and 4; and editorial harmonization and consolidation. The panel included specialists in thoracic surgery, medical oncology, respiratory medicine, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology, and related disciplines. Classes of recommendation were adapted from the European Society of Cardiology framework. All statements submitted to formal consensus voting were formally rated, with consensus predefined as at least 75% agreement. Results: The final document comprised 35 consensus statements across four domains: preoperative diagnosis and staging (n=7), surgery and postoperative surveillance (n=8), neoadjuvant and perioperative treatment (n=12), and adjuvant treatment (n=8). Across the meeting rosters, 32 unique experts were identified, with strong representation from thoracic surgery and medical oncology. The baseline survey and expert discussions highlighted implementation gaps in FDG-PET/CT, invasive mediastinal staging, biomarker testing, perioperative therapy, pathology standardization, and multidisciplinary review. All 35 consensus statements met the predefined threshold, with agreement ranging from 82% to 100%. Conclusions: These consensus statements provide a multidisciplinary, evidence-informed framework for the diagnosis and management of resectable NSCLC across the perioperative pathway. By contextualizing international evidence within Vietnamese clinical practice, the document may help improve consistency of care, support biomarker-guided and multimodality treatment, and strengthen multidisciplinary decision-making across institutions.
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.