累及淋巴结的数目:临床IA期肺腺癌较好的淋巴结分类

IF 7.6 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Mengwen Liu , Lei Miao , Rongshou Zheng , Liang Zhao , Xin Liang , Shiquan Yin , Jingjing Li , Cong Li , Meng Li , Li Zhang
{"title":"累及淋巴结的数目:临床IA期肺腺癌较好的淋巴结分类","authors":"Mengwen Liu ,&nbsp;Lei Miao ,&nbsp;Rongshou Zheng ,&nbsp;Liang Zhao ,&nbsp;Xin Liang ,&nbsp;Shiquan Yin ,&nbsp;Jingjing Li ,&nbsp;Cong Li ,&nbsp;Meng Li ,&nbsp;Li Zhang","doi":"10.1016/j.jncc.2023.07.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>With the popularization of lung cancer screening, more early-stage lung cancers are being detected. This study aims to compare three types of N classifications, including location-based N classification (pathologic nodal classification [pN]), the number of lymph node stations (nS)-based N classification (nS classification), and the combined approach proposed by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) which incorporates both pN and nS classification to determine if the nS classification is more appropriate for early-stage lung cancer.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of lung cancer patients treated at the Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences between 2005 and 2018. Inclusion criteria was clinical stage IA lung adenocarcinoma patients who underwent resection during this period. Sub-analyses were performed for the three types of N classifications. The optimal cutoff values for nS classification were determined with X-tile software. Kaplan‒Meier and multivariate Cox analyses were performed to assess the prognostic significance of the different N classifications. The prediction performance among the three types of N classifications was compared using the concordance index (C-index) and decision curve analysis (DCA).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of the 669 patients evaluated, 534 had pathological stage N0 disease (79.8%), 82 had N1 disease (12.3%) and 53 had N2 disease (7.9%). Multivariate Cox analysis indicated that all three types of N classifications were independent prognostic factors for prognosis (all <em>P</em> &lt; 0.001). However, the prognosis overlaps between pN (N1 and N2, <em>P</em> = 0.052) and IASLC-proposed N classification (N1b and N2a1 [<em>P</em> = 0.407], N2a1 and N2a2 [<em>P</em> = 0.364], and N2a2 and N2b [<em>P</em> = 0.779]), except for nS classification subgroups (nS0 and nS1 [<em>P</em> &lt; 0.001] and nS1 and nS &gt;1 [<em>P</em> = 0.006]). There was no significant difference in the C-index values between the three N classifications (<em>P</em> = 0.370). The DCA results demonstrated that the nS classification provided greater clinical utility.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The nS classification might be a better choice for nodal classification in clinical stage IA lung adenocarcinoma.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":73987,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the National Cancer Center","volume":"3 3","pages":"Pages 197-202"},"PeriodicalIF":7.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Number of involved nodal stations: a better lymph node classification for clinical stage IA lung adenocarcinoma\",\"authors\":\"Mengwen Liu ,&nbsp;Lei Miao ,&nbsp;Rongshou Zheng ,&nbsp;Liang Zhao ,&nbsp;Xin Liang ,&nbsp;Shiquan Yin ,&nbsp;Jingjing Li ,&nbsp;Cong Li ,&nbsp;Meng Li ,&nbsp;Li Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jncc.2023.07.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>With the popularization of lung cancer screening, more early-stage lung cancers are being detected. This study aims to compare three types of N classifications, including location-based N classification (pathologic nodal classification [pN]), the number of lymph node stations (nS)-based N classification (nS classification), and the combined approach proposed by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) which incorporates both pN and nS classification to determine if the nS classification is more appropriate for early-stage lung cancer.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of lung cancer patients treated at the Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences between 2005 and 2018. Inclusion criteria was clinical stage IA lung adenocarcinoma patients who underwent resection during this period. Sub-analyses were performed for the three types of N classifications. The optimal cutoff values for nS classification were determined with X-tile software. Kaplan‒Meier and multivariate Cox analyses were performed to assess the prognostic significance of the different N classifications. The prediction performance among the three types of N classifications was compared using the concordance index (C-index) and decision curve analysis (DCA).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of the 669 patients evaluated, 534 had pathological stage N0 disease (79.8%), 82 had N1 disease (12.3%) and 53 had N2 disease (7.9%). Multivariate Cox analysis indicated that all three types of N classifications were independent prognostic factors for prognosis (all <em>P</em> &lt; 0.001). However, the prognosis overlaps between pN (N1 and N2, <em>P</em> = 0.052) and IASLC-proposed N classification (N1b and N2a1 [<em>P</em> = 0.407], N2a1 and N2a2 [<em>P</em> = 0.364], and N2a2 and N2b [<em>P</em> = 0.779]), except for nS classification subgroups (nS0 and nS1 [<em>P</em> &lt; 0.001] and nS1 and nS &gt;1 [<em>P</em> = 0.006]). There was no significant difference in the C-index values between the three N classifications (<em>P</em> = 0.370). The DCA results demonstrated that the nS classification provided greater clinical utility.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The nS classification might be a better choice for nodal classification in clinical stage IA lung adenocarcinoma.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73987,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the National Cancer Center\",\"volume\":\"3 3\",\"pages\":\"Pages 197-202\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the National Cancer Center\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667005423000418\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the National Cancer Center","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667005423000418","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

随着肺癌筛查的普及,越来越多的早期肺癌被发现。本研究旨在比较基于位置的N分类(病理淋巴结分类[pN])、基于淋巴结站数(nS)的N分类(nS分类)以及国际肺癌研究协会(IASLC)提出的结合pN和nS分类的联合方法三种N分类方法,以确定N分类是否更适用于早期肺癌。方法回顾性分析2005 ~ 2018年中国医学科学院肿瘤医院肺癌患者的临床资料。纳入标准为临床分期为IA期且在此期间行肺腺癌切除术的患者。对三种N类进行亚分析。利用X-tile软件确定nS分类的最佳截止值。采用Kaplan-Meier和多变量Cox分析来评估不同N分类的预后意义。采用一致性指数(C-index)和决策曲线分析(DCA)对三种N种分类的预测效果进行比较。结果669例患者中,病理分期N0期534例(79.8%),N1期82例(12.3%),N2期53例(7.9%)。多因素Cox分析显示,三种N分类均为影响预后的独立预后因素(P <0.001)。然而,除了nS分类亚组(nS0和nS1 [P <0.001]、nS1和ns>1 [P = 0.006])。3个N类间c指数值差异无统计学意义(P = 0.370)。DCA结果表明,nS分类具有更大的临床应用价值。结论临床IA期肺腺癌淋巴结分型采用nS分型可能是较好的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Number of involved nodal stations: a better lymph node classification for clinical stage IA lung adenocarcinoma

Background

With the popularization of lung cancer screening, more early-stage lung cancers are being detected. This study aims to compare three types of N classifications, including location-based N classification (pathologic nodal classification [pN]), the number of lymph node stations (nS)-based N classification (nS classification), and the combined approach proposed by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) which incorporates both pN and nS classification to determine if the nS classification is more appropriate for early-stage lung cancer.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of lung cancer patients treated at the Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences between 2005 and 2018. Inclusion criteria was clinical stage IA lung adenocarcinoma patients who underwent resection during this period. Sub-analyses were performed for the three types of N classifications. The optimal cutoff values for nS classification were determined with X-tile software. Kaplan‒Meier and multivariate Cox analyses were performed to assess the prognostic significance of the different N classifications. The prediction performance among the three types of N classifications was compared using the concordance index (C-index) and decision curve analysis (DCA).

Results

Of the 669 patients evaluated, 534 had pathological stage N0 disease (79.8%), 82 had N1 disease (12.3%) and 53 had N2 disease (7.9%). Multivariate Cox analysis indicated that all three types of N classifications were independent prognostic factors for prognosis (all P < 0.001). However, the prognosis overlaps between pN (N1 and N2, P = 0.052) and IASLC-proposed N classification (N1b and N2a1 [P = 0.407], N2a1 and N2a2 [P = 0.364], and N2a2 and N2b [P = 0.779]), except for nS classification subgroups (nS0 and nS1 [P < 0.001] and nS1 and nS >1 [P = 0.006]). There was no significant difference in the C-index values between the three N classifications (P = 0.370). The DCA results demonstrated that the nS classification provided greater clinical utility.

Conclusion

The nS classification might be a better choice for nodal classification in clinical stage IA lung adenocarcinoma.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
14.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
70 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信