Dataset Information

Prognostic impact of lymphadenectomy on outcomes of sublobar resection for non-small cell lung cancer ?1 or >1 to 2 cm.

ABSTRACT: BackgroundLymphadenectomy is an important part of surgical treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the prognostic impact of lymph node (LN) dissection for patients with NSCLC ?1 and >1 to 2 cm who underwent sublobar resection is still unclear.MethodsA group of patients numbering 7,627 with NSCLC 2 cm or less who underwent sublobar resection were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between January 2010 and November 2015. The overall survival (OS) and lung cancer-specific survival (LCSS) were evaluated among patients who had undergone dissection of ?4 LNs, 1 to 3 LNs or who had no-LN dissection; log-rank and Cox proportional-hazards regression analyses were used for the evaluation.ResultsPatients with NSCLC ?2 cm who underwent ?4 LNs dissection had better OS and LCSS compared with those who underwent dissection of 1 to 3 LNs or who had no-LN dissection after sublobar resection. Subgroup analysis showed that dissection of ?4 LNs had better OS and LCSS than those of 1 to 3 LNs dissection in NSCLC >1 to 2 cm, whereas had similar OS and LCSS in NSCLC ?1 cm. Multivariate Cox analysis showed that dissection of 1 to 3 LNs was not an independent risk factor of OS and LCSS than dissection of ?4 LNs in NSCLC ?1 cm after sublobar resection.ConclusionsThe extent of LN dissection is associated with the survival outcomes in patients with NSCLC ?2 cm after sublobar resection. Dissection of ?4 LNs should be recommended for NSCLC >1 to 2 cm, whereas surgeons can rely on surgical skills and patient profiles to decide ?4 LNs or 1 to 3 LNs dissection for NSCLC ?1 cm during sublobar resection.

SUBMITTER: Zheng E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7330392 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The incidence of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) among the elderly is expected to rise dramatically owing to demographic trends and increased computed tomographic screening. However, to our knowledge, no modern trials have compared the most common treatments for NSCLC.To determine clinical characteristics and survival outcomes associated with the 3 most commonly used definitive therapies for early-stage NSCLC in the elderly.The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database linked to Medicare was used to determine the baseline characteristics and outcomes of 9093 patients with early-stage, node-negative NSCLC who underwent definitive treatment consisting of lobectomy, sublobar resection, or stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) from January 1, 2003, through December 31, 2009.Overall and lung cancer-specific survival were compared using Medicare claims through December 31, 2012. We used proportional hazards regression and propensity score matching to adjust outcomes for key patient, tumor, and practice environment factors.The median age was 75 years, and treatment distribution was 79.3% for lobectomy, 16.5% for sublobar resection, and 4.2% for SABR. Unadjusted 90-day mortality was highest for lobectomy (4.0%) followed by sublobar resection (3.7%; P = .79) and SABR (1.3%; P = .008). At 3 years, unadjusted mortality was lowest for lobectomy (25.0%), followed by sublobar resection (35.3%; P < .001) and SABR (45.1%; P < .001). Proportional hazards regression demonstrated that sublobar resection was associated with worse overall survival (adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 1.32 [95% CI, 1.20-1.44]; P < .001) and lung cancer-specific survival (AHR, 1.50 [95% CI, 1.29-1.75]; P < .001) compared with lobectomy. Propensity score-matching analysis reiterated these findings for overall survival (AHR, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.17-1.58]; P < .001) and lung cancer-specific survival (AHR, 1.46 [95% CI, 1.13-1.90]; P = .004). In proportional hazards regression, SABR was associated with better overall survival than lobectomy in the first 6 months after diagnosis (AHR, 0.45 [95% CI, 0.27-0.75]; P < .001) but worse survival thereafter (AHR, 1.66 [95% CI, 1.39-1.99]; P < .001). Propensity score-matching analysis of well-matched SABR and lobectomy cohorts demonstrated similar overall survival in both groups (AHR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.74-1.38]; P = .94).Lobectomy was associated with better outcomes than sublobar resection in elderly patients with early-stage NSCLC. Propensity score matching suggests that SABR may be a good option among patients with very advanced age and multiple comorbidities.

Project description:Background To investigate postoperative temporary consequences of the enrolled patients with lung adenocarcinoma. Patients and Methods We analyzed the clinical data of patients with lung adenocarcinoma admitted by the same surgical team of Peking Union Medical College Hospital (PUMCH) from July 2019 to December 2019. Statistical methods including propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was used to analyze the differences among them. Results A total of 108 patients were enrolled, including 50 patients with sublobar resection and 58 patients with lobectomy. Before PSM, there were statistically significant differences in age (p=0.015), hospitalization costs (p=0.042), lymphadenectomy (p=0.000), pathological staging (p=0.000), number of lymph nodes removed (p=0.000), number of positive lymph nodes (p=0.034), chest drainage duration (p=0.000), total chest drainage (p=0.000), length of postoperative hospital stays (p=0.000), postoperative D-dimer level (p=0.030) and perioperative lymphocyte margin (LM) (p=0.003) between sublobar resection and lobectomy. After PSM, there were statistical differences in number of lymph nodes removed (p=0.000), chest drainage duration (p=0.031) and total chest drainage (p=0.002) between sublobar resection and lobectomy. Whether with PSM analysis or not, there were no significant differences in other blood test results, such as inflammation indicators, postoperative neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), albumin level, perioperative activity of daily living (ADL) scale scoring margin, complications, postoperative admission to intensive care unit (ICU) and readmission within 30 days. NLR was associated with total chest drainage (p=0.000), length of postoperative hospital stays (p=0.000), postoperative D-dimer level (p=0.050) and ADL scale scoring margin (p=0.003) between sublobar resection and lobectomy. Conclusion Sublobar resection, including wedge resection and segmentectomy, was as safe and feasible as lobectomy in our study, and they shared similar short-term outcomes. Postoperative NLR could be used to detect the clinical outcomes of patients. Secondary resectability of pulmonary function (SRPF) should be the main purpose of sublobar resection.

Dataset Information

Prognostic impact of lymphadenectomy on outcomes of sublobar resection for non-small cell lung cancer ?1 or >1 to 2 cm.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets