Dataset Information

Choice of surgical procedure - lobectomy, segmentectomy, or wedge resection - for patients with stage T1-2N0M0 small cell lung cancer: A population-based study.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:To date, few studies have evaluated the impact of lobectomy versus sublobar resection for early small cell lung cancer (SCLC). We investigated the survival rates of patients with pathological stage T1-2N0M0 SCLC who underwent lobectomy or sublobar resection. METHODS:We identified 548 SCLC patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database who underwent lobectomy or sublobar resection. Propensity score matching (PSM) and Cox regression analysis were used to adjust for baseline characteristics. RESULTS:The three-year overall survival (OS) of patients treated with lobectomy (n?=?376, 60%) was significantly higher than those treated with sublobar resection (n?=?172, 38%). PSM and Cox multivariable analysis further confirmed this result (hazard ratio [HR] 0.543, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.421-0.680; P?

SUBMITTER: Liu Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6449329 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Choice of surgical procedure - lobectomy, segmentectomy, or wedge resection - for patients with stage T1-2N0M0 small cell lung cancer: A population-based study.

Liu Yang Y Shan Lanlan L Shen Jianfei J Liu Liping L Wang Jinlin J He Jiaxi J He Qihua Q Jiang Long L Guo Minzhang M Chen Xuewei X Zeng Haikang H Xia Xiaojun X Peng Guilin G Liang Wenhua W He Jianxing J

Thoracic cancer 20190310 4

<h4>Background</h4>To date, few studies have evaluated the impact of lobectomy versus sublobar resection for early small cell lung cancer (SCLC). We investigated the survival rates of patients with pathological stage T1-2N0M0 SCLC who underwent lobectomy or sublobar resection.<h4>Methods</h4>We identified 548 SCLC patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database who underwent lobectomy or sublobar resection. Propensity score matching (PSM) and Cox regression analysis were use ...[more]

PMID: 30854808

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundClinical decision-making for patients with stage I lung cancer is complex. It involves multiple options (lobectomy, segmentectomy, wedge, stereotactic body radiotherapy, thermal ablation), weighing multiple outcomes (e.g., short-, intermediate-, long-term) and multiple aspects of each (e.g., magnitude of a difference, the degree of confidence in the evidence, and the applicability to the patient and setting at hand). A structure is needed to summarize the relevant evidence for an individual patient and to identify which outcomes have the greatest impact on the decision-making.MethodsA PubMed systematic review from 2000-2021 of outcomes after lobectomy, segmentectomy and wedge resection in generally healthy patients is the focus of this paper. Evidence was abstracted from randomized trials and non-randomized comparisons with at least some adjustment for confounders. The analysis involved careful assessment, including characteristics of patients, settings, residual confounding etc. to expose degrees of uncertainty and applicability to individual patients. Evidence is summarized that provides an at-a-glance overall impression as well as the ability to delve into layers of details of the patients, settings and treatments involved.ResultsIn healthy patients there is no short-term benefit to sublobar resection vs. lobectomy in randomized and non-randomized comparisons. A detriment in long-term outcomes is demonstrated by adjusted non-randomized comparisons, more marked for wedge than segmentectomy. Quality-of-life data is confounded by the use of video-assisted approaches; evidence suggests the approach has more impact than the resection extent. Differences in pulmonary function tests by resection extent are not clinically meaningful in healthy patients, especially for multi-segmentectomy vs. lobectomy. The margin distance is associated with the risk of recurrence.ConclusionsA systematic, comprehensive summary of evidence regarding resection extent in healthy patients with attention to aspects of applicability, uncertainty and effect modifiers provides a foundation on which to build a framework for individualized clinical decision-making.

Project description:BackgroundSegmentectomy is a standard procedure, and there is considerable data on routine segmentectomies. However, there are only few reports on lobectomy performed in combination with segmentectomy (lobectomy + segmentectomy). Thus, we aimed to clarify the clinicopathological features and surgical outcomes of lobectomy + segmentectomy.MethodsWe reviewed patients who underwent lobectomy + segmentectomy between January 2010 and July 2021 at Gunma University Hospital, Japan. We comparatively analyzed clinicopathological data of patients who underwent lobectomy + segmentectomy and those who underwent lobectomy in combination with wedge resection (lobectomy + wedge resection).ResultsWe collected data from 22 patients who underwent lobectomy + segmentectomy and 72 who underwent lobectomy + wedge resection. Lobectomy + segmentectomy was mainly performed to treat lung cancer, and the median number of resected segments was 4.5 and the median number of lesions was 2. Lobectomy + segmentectomy was associated with a higher rate of thoracotomy and a longer operation time. Incidence of overall complications, including pulmonary fistula and pneumonia was higher in the lobectomy + segmentectomy group. However, there were no significant differences in the length of drainage, major complications, and mortality. For lobectomy + segmentectomy, the only left-sided procedure was a left lower lobectomy + lingulectomy, whereas procedures were diverse on the right side, mostly combining a right upper or middle lobectomy with atypical segmentectomies.ConclusionsLobectomy + segmentectomy was performed for (I) multiple lung lesions, (II) lesions invading an adjacent lobe, or (III) lesions with a metastatic lymph node invading the bronchial bifurcation. Although lobectomy + segmentectomy is a lung-preserving procedure that can benefit patients with multiple or advanced diseases involving two lobes, this procedure should still be performed following a careful patient selection process.

Project description:BackgroundClinical decision-making for patients with stage I lung cancer is complex. It involves multiple options [lobectomy, segmentectomy, wedge, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), thermal ablation], weighing multiple outcomes (e.g., short-, intermediate-, long-term) and multiple aspects of each (e.g., magnitude of a difference, the degree of confidence in the evidence, and the applicability to the patient and setting at hand). A structure is needed to summarize the relevant evidence for an individual patient and to identify which outcomes have the greatest impact on the decision-making.MethodsA PubMed systematic review from 2000-2021 of outcomes after SBRT or thermal ablation vs. resection is the focus of this paper. Evidence was abstracted from randomized trials and non-randomized comparisons with at least some adjustment for confounders. The analysis involved careful assessment, including characteristics of patients, settings, residual confounding etc. to expose degrees of uncertainty and applicability to individual patients. Evidence is summarized that provides an at-a-glance overall impression as well as the ability to delve into layers of details of the patients, settings and treatments involved.ResultsShort-term outcomes are meaningfully better after SBRT than resection. SBRT doesn't affect quality-of-life (QOL), on average pulmonary function is not altered, but a minority of patients may experience gradual late toxicity. Adjusted non-randomized comparisons demonstrate a clinically relevant detriment in long-term outcomes after SBRT vs. surgery. The short-term benefits of SBRT over surgery are accentuated with increasing age and compromised patients, but the long-term detriment remains. Ablation is associated with a higher rate of complications than SBRT, but there is little intermediate-term impact on quality-of-life or pulmonary function tests. Adjusted comparisons show a meaningful detriment in long-term outcomes after ablation vs. surgery; there is less difference between ablation and SBRT.ConclusionsA systematic, comprehensive summary of evidence regarding Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy or thermal ablation vs. resection with attention to aspects of applicability, uncertainty and effect modifiers provides a foundation for a framework for individualized decision-making.

Dataset Information

Choice of surgical procedure - lobectomy, segmentectomy, or wedge resection - for patients with stage T1-2N0M0 small cell lung cancer: A population-based study.

Publications

Choice of surgical procedure - lobectomy, segmentectomy, or wedge resection - for patients with stage T1-2N0M0 small cell lung cancer: A population-based study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets