MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

En bloc resection of pulmonary sulcus non-small cell lung cancer invading the spine: A systematic review and pooled analysis.

2013· review· en· W2601873859 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphane Collaud, Élie Fadel, J. Schirren, Hiroyasu Yokomise, Servet Bölükbas, Philippe Dartevelle, Shaf Keshavjee, Thomas K. Waddell, Marc de Perrot

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSulcusLung cancerRadiation therapySurgeryChemotherapyChemoradiotherapyCancerRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e18503 Background: Treatment of locally advanced NSCLC is debated. While survival for inoperable disease ranges between 3-17%, carefully selected patients can be cured when treated surgically in a multimodality concept. Here, we conducted a systematic literature review and pooled data analysis of patients after en bloc resection for pulmonary sulcus NSCLC invading the spine. Outcome and prognostic factors were described. Methods: The MEDLINE database was searched using the PubMed engine to retrieve all relevant articles related to en bloc resection for pulmonary sulcus NSCLC invading the spine. All articles’ corresponding authors were contacted to share their most updated anonymized patient’s data. Data were pooled and analyzed, focusing on outcome and prognostic factors. Results: Search strategy yielded a total of 134 articles. Out of these, only 6 were relevant and non-duplicative. Four out of 6 authors were able to share updated data for a total of 135 patients. All tumors were resected en bloc with the lung, chest wall and spine. Induction treatment was administered in 87 (64%) patients and consisted of chemotherapy (n=32), radiation (n=1) or concurrent chemoradiation (n=54). Spine resections included total (n=23), hemi- (n=94) and partial (n=18) vertebrectomies. Complete resection was achieved in 120 (89%) patients. Five patients died in the postoperative period (4%). Adjuvant treatment was administered in 70 (52%) patients and included chemotherapy (n=16), radiotherapy (n=22) or chemoradiation (n=32). Median follow-up was 26 months. Overall 3-, 5- and 10-year survivals were 57%, 43% and 27%, respectively. Results of the univariate analysis (Cox, Breslow tests) identified incomplete surgical resection (R0 vs R1/2, p<0.001) as the only significant prognostic factors among the variables tested (age, histology, pN stage, type of induction/adjuvant treatment, type of lung resection). Conclusions: Multimodality therapy including en bloc resection for pulmonary sulcus NSCLC invading the spine provides excellent long-term survival. Complete surgical resection is the only determinant for survival. No difference was shown for patients treated with induction vs adjuvant therapy.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.016
Bibliometrics0.0130.015
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.482
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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→