4.7 Article

Limited Resection for the Treatment of Patients With Stage IA Lung Cancer

期刊

ANNALS OF SURGERY
卷 251, 期 3, 页码 550-554

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181c0e5f3

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. National Cancer Institute [1R01CA125447-01A1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Lobectomy is the standard of care for stage IA lung cancer. Some small retrospective studies have suggested similar results after limited resection for tumors <= 2 cm in size. The objective of the study was to compare survival after lobectomy and limited resection among Medicare patients with lung cancer. Methods: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry, linked to Medicare records, we identified 1165 cases of stage I lung cancer <= 2 cm in size that underwent lobectomy or limited resection (segmentectomy or wedge resection). We used logistic regression to determine propensity scores for undergoing limited resection based on the patients' preoperative characteristics. Overall and lung cancer-specific survival of patients treated with lobectomy or limited resection was compared after adjusting for their propensity score. Results: Overall, 196 (17%) patients underwent limited resection. For the entire sample, the adjusted hazard ratio for all cause mortality (1.09; 95% confidence interval: 0.85-1.40) or lung cancer-specific death (hazard ratio: 1.39; 95% confidence interval: 0.97-2.01) for patients undergoing limited resection were not significantly different from those having lobectomy. Similarly, we found no significant differences in overall or lung cancer-specific survival for patients treated with limited resection compared with lobectomy when data was analyzed stratifying and matching patients by their propensity scores. Conclusions: These results suggest that survival of patients >65 years of age undergoing limited resection or lobectomy for stage IA tumors <= 2 cm appears to be similar. Although these findings should be confirmed in prospective trials, our results suggest that limited resection may be an effective therapeutic alternative for these patients.

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

4.7
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