4.6 Article

Centrally located lung cancer and risk of occult nodal disease: an objective evaluation of multiple definitions of tumour centrality with dedicated imaging software

期刊

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL
卷 53, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY SOC JOURNALS LTD
DOI: 10.1183/13993003.02220-2018

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: Current guidelines recommend invasive mediastinal staging in patients with centrally located radiographic stage T1N0M0 nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The lack of a specific definition of a central tumour has resulted in discrepancies among guidelines and heterogeneity in practice patterns. Methods: Our objective was to study specific definitions of tumour centrality and their association with occult nodal disease. Pre-operative chest computed tomography scans from patients with clinical (c) T1N0M0 NSCLC were processed with a dedicated software system that divides the lungs in thirds following vertical and concentric lines. This software accurately assigns tumours to a specific third based both on the location of the centre of the tumour and its most medial aspect, creating eight possible definitions of central tumours. Results: 607 patients were included in our study. Surgery was performed for 596 tumours (98%). The overall pathological (p) N disease was: 504 (83%) N0, 56 (9%) N1, 47 (8%) N2 and no N3. The prevalence of N2 disease remained relatively low regardless of tumour location. Central tumours were associated with upstaging from cN0 to any N (pN1/pN2). Two definitions were associated with upstaging to any N: concentric lines, inner one-third, centre of the tumour (OR 3.91, 95% CI 1.85-8.26; p< 0.001) and concentric lines, inner two-thirds, most medial aspect of the tumour (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.23-2.97; p=0.004). Conclusions: We objectively identified two specific definitions of central tumours. While the rate of occult mediastinal disease was relatively low regardless of tumour location, central tumours were associated with upstaging from cN0 to any N.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据