Bibliographic record
Abstract
Central MessageDivision of the pulmonary vein as the first step of a lobectomy to reduce shedding of tumor cells into the circulation is an intriguing hypothesis but requires further evaluation.See Editorial page 350. Division of the pulmonary vein as the first step of a lobectomy to reduce shedding of tumor cells into the circulation is an intriguing hypothesis but requires further evaluation. See Editorial page 350. Surgeons continue to play a vital role in the treatment of lung cancer in the 21st century, but the operation itself has become mostly routine. The prospect that an aspect of surgical technique could influence metastasis in the future is exciting and represents a rare translational link between surgical care and cancer cell biology. In this issue of the Journal, Wakeam and colleagues1Wakeam E. Ball H. Reddy R. What's in a vein?.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Tech. 2020; 3: 350-353Google Scholar discuss a recent article by Wei and colleagues2Wei S. Guo C. He J. Tan Q. Mei J. Yang Z. et al.Effect of vein-first vs artery-first surgical technique on circulating tumor cells and survival in patients with non–small cell lung cancer: a randomized clinical trial and registry-based propensity score matching analysis.JAMA Surg. 2019; 154: e190972Crossref PubMed Scopus (20) Google Scholar on how a “vein-first” surgical technique can potentially reduce the release of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) into the bloodstream during resection and also review the biology of circulating tumor cells. The concept of CTCs is not a new one. Paget3Paget S. The distribution of secondary growths in cancer of the breast. 1889.Cancer Metastasis Rev. 1989; 8: 98-101PubMed Google Scholar described the “seed and soil” theory of cancer metastases almost 150 years previously. However, these “seeds” of cancer metastases have only recently been reliably detected using novel technologies and strategies.4Banko P. Lee S.Y. Nagygyorgy V. Zrínyi M. Chae C.H. Cho D.H. et al.Technologies for circulating tumor cell separation from whole blood.J Hematol Oncol. 2019; 12: 48Crossref PubMed Scopus (68) Google Scholar These remain imperfect, with challenges in the sensitivity and reproducibility of CTC detection limiting clinical translation. The other challenge is biological; there is no gold-standard marker that defines a CTC, and CTCs from different cancers will likely be different from each other.5Barriere G. Fici P. Gallerani G. Fabbri F. Zoli W. Rigaud M. Circulating tumor cells and epithelial, mesenchymal and stemness markers: characterization of cell subpopulations.Ann Transl Med. 2014; 2: 109Crossref PubMed Scopus (78) Google Scholar CTC detection is therefore like looking for a needle in a haystack without fully knowing what the needle looks like. To detect lung cancer CTCs, Wei and colleagues defined a CTC as a circulating cell that carried a folate receptor. They then used an oligonucleotide conjugated to folic acid as a ligand for the receptor and polymerase chain reaction was used to amplify the oligonucleotide sequence as an indirect measure of folate receptor–containing cells.6Chen X. Zhou F. Li X. Yang G. Zhang L. Ren S. et al.Folate receptor-positive circulating tumor cell detected by LT-PCR-based method as a diagnostic biomarker for non–small-cell lung cancer.J Thorac Oncol. 2015; 10: 1163-1171Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (62) Google Scholar This represents a compromise in balancing sensitivity of detection, CTC biology, and reproducibility. However, it results in data in which CTCs are not directly detected and only cells that possess folate receptors would be classified as CTCs. Wakeam and colleagues highlight the weaknesses in this detection strategy in their article. The other major issue is whether CTCs thought to be liberated by surgical manipulation of the tumor have any real metastatic potential. Only a very select few CTCs possess metastatic potential, and these cells may need to undergo a transformation such as epithelial-to-mesenchymal transformation or another as yet-unknown mechanism before they become metastatic.7Lamouille S. Xu J. Derynck R. Molecular mechanisms of epithelial-mesenchymal transition.Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2014; 15: 178-196Crossref PubMed Scopus (4111) Google Scholar Tumor cells released into the bloodstream by a surgeon's grasp may not have these changes and simply die. Moreover, if this transformation results in the loss of the folate receptor, this more dangerous population would not have been identified by Wei and colleagues. Again, Wakeam and colleagues discuss this issue and the difficulties with the early clinical end points established in the study by Wei and colleagues. As surgeons, we have the privilege of directly impacting patient outcomes in the operating room. A change in technique that could impact metastatic potential in the future, especially one as straightforward as a vein-first approach, is extremely enticing. However, there remain technical and biological hurdles in confirming the hypothesis of Wei and colleagues. Future studies are warranted. What's in a vein?JTCVS TechniquesVol. 3PreviewFeature Editor Note—In this Invited Expert Opinion article, Wakeam and colleagues review the basic science of circulating tumor cells in non–small cell lung cancer in light of a recent randomized study from Wei and colleagues on the impact of a vein-first versus artery-first surgical lobectomy technique on circulating tumor cells and survival recently published in the Journal of the American Medical Association Surgery. The group at University of Michigan has expertise in the isolation of circulating tumor cells using intraoperative aspiration from the pulmonary vein. Full-Text PDF Open Access
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".