Prognostic impact of lymphadenectomy on outcomes of sublobar resection for non-small cell lung cancer ?1 or >1 to 2 cm.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Zheng E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7330392 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe increased detection of small-sized peripheral non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has renewed interest in sublobar resection in lieu of lobectomy.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, noninferiority, phase 3 trial in which patients with NSCLC clinically staged as T1aN0 (tumor size, ≤2 cm) were randomly assigned to undergo sublobar resection or lobar resection after intraoperative confirmation of node-negative disease. The primary end point was disease-free survival, defined as the time between randomization and disease recurrence or death from any cause. Secondary end points were overall survival, locoregional and systemic recurrence, and pulmonary functions.ResultsFrom June 2007 through March 2017, a total of 697 patients were assigned to undergo sublobar resection (340 patients) or lobar resection (357 patients). After a median follow-up of 7 years, sublobar resection was noninferior to lobar resection for disease-free survival (hazard ratio for disease recurrence or death, 1.01; 90% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 1.24). In addition, overall survival after sublobar resection was similar to that after lobar resection (hazard ratio for death, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.26). The 5-year disease-free survival was 63.6% (95% CI, 57.9 to 68.8) after sublobar resection and 64.1% (95% CI, 58.5 to 69.0) after lobar resection. The 5-year overall survival was 80.3% (95% CI, 75.5 to 84.3) after sublobar resection and 78.9% (95% CI, 74.1 to 82.9) after lobar resection. No substantial difference was seen between the two groups in the incidence of locoregional or distant recurrence. At 6 months postoperatively, a between-group difference of 2 percentage points was measured in the median percentage of predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second, favoring the sublobar-resection group.ConclusionsIn patients with peripheral NSCLC with a tumor size of 2 cm or less and pathologically confirmed node-negative disease in the hilar and mediastinal lymph nodes, sublobar resection was not inferior to lobectomy with respect to disease-free survival. Overall survival was similar with the two procedures. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; CALGB 140503 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00499330.).
| S-EPMC10036605 | biostudies-literature
Project description:(1) Background: Sublobar resection can be used as an alternative surgical strategy for early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. However, the choice between wedge resection and segmentectomy remains contentious. In this study, we investigated the optimal surgical procedure for sublobar resection in patients with NSCLC ≤ 2 cm with a lobe-specific analysis; (2) Methods: Data for patients with T1N0M0 with a diameter of ≤2 cm who had undergone sublobar resection were retrieved. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to reduce the inherent bias, and the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank tests were used to assess the differences in survival; (3) Results: A total of 1882 patients were identified after the PSM. Patients with NSCLC ≤ 2 cm who had undergone segmentectomy showed better survival than those who had undergone wedge resection. However, when NSCLC was ≤1 cm, there was no significant difference in OS between the two groups. This demonstrated an OS advantage of segmentectomy over wedge resection for patients with NSCLC tumors of 1-2 cm (p = 0.024). Further analysis indicated that this survival benefit was only observed in patients with right upper NSCLC of 1-2 cm, but not with NSCLC in the other four lobes; (4) Conclusions: Segmentectomy showed a greater survival benefit than wedge resection only in patients with NSCLC of 1-2 cm, particularly those with primary tumors in the right upper lobe. Therefore, we propose a lobe-specific sublobar resection strategy for early-stage NSCLC patients (tumors of 1-2 cm) who cannot tolerate lobectomy.
| S-EPMC9265391 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Surgery is the gold standard treatment of lung cancer. The minimally invasive technique does not only concern access to the chest but also the limits of parenchymal resection. The study debates on the safety and oncological adequacy of sublobar resections in bronchogenic carcinoma patients. A systematic analysis of the data in the literature was carried out, comparing the outcomes of patients with resectable non-small lung cancer (NSCLC) who underwent lobectomy or sublobar resection. These last interventions include both segmentectomies and wedge resections taking into consideration the following parameters: complications, relapse rate and overall survival. The complication rate is higher in patients underwent lobectomy compared to sublobar resection, especially in presence of high comorbidity index or octogenarian patients (overall values respectively between 0 and 48% and 0 and 46.6%). Contrarily, the relapse rate (6.2% to 32% vs. 3.6% to 53.4%) and overall survival (50.2% to 93.8% vs. 38.6% to 100%) are more favorable in patients undergoing lobectomy. Sublobar resections are particularly indicated in elderly patients and in patients with high comorbidity index or reduced respiratory functional reserve. However, pulmonary lobectomy still remains the safest and oncologically correct method in patients with good performance status or higher risk of recurrence.
| S-EPMC7330740 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThis work was performed to develop and validate procedure-specific risk prediction for recurrence following resection for early-stage lung adenocarcinoma (ADC) and investigate risk prediction utility in identifying patients who may benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT).MethodsIn patients who underwent resection for small (≤2 cm) lung ADC (lobectomy, 557; sublobar resection, 352), an association between clinicopathologic variables and risk of recurrence was assessed by a competing risks approach. Procedure-specific risk prediction was developed based on multivariable regression for recurrence. External validation was conducted using cohorts (N = 708) from Japan, Taiwan, and Germany. The accuracy of risk prediction was measured using a concordance index. We applied the lobectomy risk prediction approach to a propensity score-matched cohort of patients with stage II-III disease (n = 316, after matching) with or without ACT and compared lung cancer-specific survival between groups among low- or high-risk scores.ResultsMicropapillary pattern, solid pattern, lymphovascular invasion, and necrosis were involved in the risk prediction following lobectomy, and micropapillary pattern, spread through air spaces, lymphovascular invasion, and necrosis following sublobar resection. Both internal and external validation showed good discrimination (concordance index in lobectomy and sublobar resection: internal, 0.77 and 0.75, respectively; and external, 0.73 and 0.79, respectively). In the stage II-III propensity score-matched cohort, among high-risk patients, ACT significantly reduced the risk of lung cancer-specific death (subhazard ratio 0.43, p = 0.001), but not among low-risk patients.ConclusionsProcedure-specific risk prediction for patients with resected small lung ADC can be used to better prognosticate and stratify patients for further interventions.
| S-EPMC6309652 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC4401470 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLung cancer in the right middle lobe has a poorer prognosis than tumors located in other lobes. The optimal surgical procedure for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the right middle lobe has not yet been elucidated. The aim of this study was to compare survival rates after lobectomy and sublobar resection for early-stage right middle lobe NSCLC.MethodsPatients who underwent lobectomy or sublobar resection for stage IA right middle lobe NSCLC tumors ? 2 cm between 2004 and 2014 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database of 18 registries. Cox regression model analysis was used to evaluate the prognostic factors. The lung cancer-specific survival (LCSS) and overall survival (OS) rates between the two groups were compared.ResultsA total of 861 patients met our criteria, including 662 (76.9%) patients who underwent lobectomy and 199 (23.1%) patients who underwent sublobar resection. No statistical differences in LCSS and OS rates were identified between the groups of patients with stage IA right middle lobe NSCLC ? 1 cm. For tumors > 1-2 cm, lobectomy was associated with more favorable LCSS and OS rates compared to sublobar resection.ConclusionLobectomy and sublobar resection deliver a comparable prognosis for patients with stage IA right middle lobe NSCLC ? 1 cm. For tumors > 1-2 cm, lobectomy showed better survival rates than sublobar resection.
| S-EPMC6068437 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThis study aimed to develop a practical nomogram to predict prognosis in patients who are undergoing sublobar resection for stage IA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Data from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) databases were used to construct the nomogram.MethodsData from patients undergoing sublobar resection for stage IA NSCLC diagnosed between 2004 and 2014 were extracted from the SEER database. Factors that may predict the outcome were identified using the Kaplan-Meier method and the Cox proportional-hazards model. A nomogram was constructed to predict the 3- and 5-year overall survival (OS) and lung cancer-specific survival (LCSS) rates of these patients. The predictive accuracy of the nomogram was measured using the concordance index (C-index) and calibration curve.ResultsA total of 4,866 patients were selected for this study. Using univariate and multivariate analyses, eight independent prognostic factors associated with OS were identified, including sex (P<0.001), age (P<0.001), race (P=0.043), marital status (P=0.009), pathology (P=0.004), differentiation (P<0.001), tumor size (P<0.001), and surgery (P=0.001), and five independent prognostic factors associated with LCSS were also identified, including sex (P<0.001), age (P<0.001), differentiation (P<0.001), tumor size (P<0.001), and surgery (P=0.011). A nomogram was established based on these results and validated using the internal bootstrap resampling method. The C-index of the established nomogram for OS and LCSS was 0.649 (95% CI: 0.635-0.663) and 0.640 (95% CI: 0.622-0.658), respectively. The calibration curves for probability of 3-, and 5-year OS and LCSS rates demonstrated good agreement between the nomogram prediction and actual observation.ConclusionThis innovative nomogram delivered a relatively accurate individual prognostic prediction for patients undergoing sublobar resection for stage IA NSCLC.
| S-EPMC6284539 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The use of low-dose computed tomography for screening has improved the detection of early-stage lung cancers. In addition, two large clinical studies have recently reported good outcomes of sublobar resection for early-stage lung cancers, increasing the need for limited resection. However, locoregional recurrence is an important issue in sublobar resection, and R0-resection with sufficient surgical margin is essential to prevent recurrences. This study aimed to investigate the suitable surgical margin distance after sublobar resection of lung cancers with a review of the literature. We used the PubMed interface to search the Medline database for retrieving literature related to surgical margin after sublobar resection published between 2003 and 2023. Overall, 175 papers were found; of them, we investigated the outcomes of 18 selected papers. The correlation between the actual surgical margin distances and recurrences was evaluated in seven articles. All the articles, except one, indicated that an increased margin distance was associated with survival and a lower risk of locoregional recurrence. Further, a surgical margin of 9-15 mm was reported to be sufficient. The correlation between the margin-tumor ratio (M/T) and recurrences was investigated in six articles, most of which demonstrated that the ratio of <1 would be a remarkable predictor of recurrence or poor survival. Although the correlation between surgical margin and spread through air spaces (STAS) was discussed in four articles, their findings remain debatable. A surgical margin of >10 mm or M/T of ≥1 would be necessary for sublobar resection for STAS-negative early-stage non-small cell lung cancer, although it is difficult to draw a definite conclusion about the appropriate surgical margin because of the characteristics of available literature (mainly retrospective, with different inclusion criteria and surgical margin measurement methods).
| S-EPMC10636452 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesStereotactic ablative radiation (SABR) is a promising alternative to lobectomy or sublobar resection for early lung cancer, but the value of SABR in comparison to surgical therapy remains debated. We examined the cost-effectiveness of SABR relative to surgery using SEER-Medicare data.Materials and methodsPatients age ≥66 years with localized (<5 cm) non-small cell lung cancers diagnosed from 2003-2009 were selected. Propensity score matching generated cohorts comparing SABR with either sublobar resection or lobectomy. Costs were determined via claims. Median survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs) were constructed from joint distribution of incremental costs and effects estimated by non-parametric bootstrap.ResultsIn comparing SABR to sublobar resection, 5-year total costs were $55,120 with SABR vs. $77,964 with sublobar resection (P<0.001) and median survival was 3.6 years with SABR vs. 4.1 years with sublobar resection (P=0.95). The ICER for sublobar resection compared to SABR was $45,683/life-year gained, yielding a 46% probability that sublobar resection is cost-effective. In comparing SABR to lobectomy, 5-year total costs were $54,968 with SABR vs. $82,641 with lobectomy (P<0.001) and median survival was 3.8 years with SABR vs. 4.7 years with lobectomy (P=0.81). The ICER for lobectomy compared to SABR was $28,645/life-year gained, yielding a 78% probability that lobectomy is cost-effective.ConclusionSABR is less costly than surgery. While lobectomy may be cost-effective compared to SABR, sublobar resection is less likely to be cost-effective. Assessment of the relative value of SABR versus surgical therapy requires further research.
| S-EPMC4536110 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC7534848 | biostudies-literature