MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Number of lymph nodes harvested from a mediastinal lymphadenectomy: Results of the randomized, prospective ACOSOG Z0030 trial

2007· article· en· W2284852360 on OpenAlexaff
Mark S. Allen, Gail Darling, Paul A. Decker, Joe B. Putnam, R Malthaner, Richard Inculet, David R. Jones, R. McKenna, Rodney J. Landreneau

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLymphadenectomyLymph nodeLymphMediastinal lymph nodeAdenocarcinomaStage (stratigraphy)Lung cancerSurgeryCancerOncologyInternal medicineMetastasisPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

7555 Background: Lymph node status is a major determinant of stage and survival in patients with lung cancer; however, little information is available about the yield of a mediastinal lymphadenectomy done at the time of pulmonary resection. Methods: The ACOSOG Z0030 trial is a prospective, randomized trial of mediastinal lymph node sampling versus complete mediastinal lymphadenectomy during an operation for early stage lung cancer. Total enrollment from July 1999 to February 2004 was 1,111 patients, of which 1,023 were eligible and/or evaluable. There were 524 patients who underwent complete mediastinal lymph node resection after randomization to this arm that were declared eligible and/or evaluable with lymph node data available. The number of lymph nodes examined from each station was collected beginning in January 2002. Prospectively collected data from these patients was analyzed to determine the number of lymph nodes obtained. Results: Median age was 67 (range 37–87) and 267 (52%) were men. Histology was squamous cell in 141 (27%), adenocarcinoma in 227 (44%), large cell in 22 (4%), bronchoavelolar in 32 (6%) and other non-small cell in 99 (19%). There were 317 right sided cancers and 207 left sided cancers. For lymphadenectomy for cancers in the right lung the yield from station 2R was a median of 2 lymph nodes (range 1 to 15), station 4R was 2 (1 –17), station 7 was 2 (1–24), station 8 was 1 (1–5), station 9 was 1 (1–6) and station 10R was 1 (1–10). For lymphadenectomy for cancers on the left side the yield from station 2L was 2 (1–4), station 4L was 1 (1–12), station 5 was 2 (1–18), station 6 was 2 (1–11), station 7 was 2 (1–16), station 8 was 1 (1–3), station 9 was 1 (1–8) and 10L was 2 (1–12). The total number of lymph nodes or fragments obtained for right sided cancers was a median of 13.5 (range 1 to 56) and for left sided tumors 15 (range 4 to 81). Conclusions: Although high variability exists in the actual number of lymph nodes obtained from various nodal stations, a complete mediastinal lymphadenectomy should obtain one or more lymph nodes from each mediastinal station. Adequate mediastinal lymphadenectomy should include exploration and remove of lymph nodes from stations 2R, 4R, 7, 8, and 9 for right sided cancers and stations 4L, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 for left sided cancers. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.391 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207