| Title |
Recurrence risk after preoperative biopsy in patients with resected early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer: a retrospective study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cancer Management and Research, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/cmar.s166930 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chengping Hu, Juan Jiang, Yuanyuan Li, Chunfang Zhang, Weixing Zhang, Haihe Jiang, Yang Gao, Wei Zhuang, Kaibo Lei, Yong Tang, Rongjun Wan |
| Abstract |
Tumor cell dissemination after needle biopsy has been reported in a variety of malignancies, including non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, there is little clinical evidence in regard to whether preoperative biopsy increases the risk of recurrence in completely resected NSCLC. A total of 322 patients diagnosed as pathological stage I NSCLC using intraoperative biopsy (IOB) (control group), preoperative percutaneous needle biopsy (PNB) or bronchoscopic biopsy were included in this study. Baseline characteristics were collected and compared. The disease-free survival (DFS) of patients was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method. Subgroup analysis and Cox regression were performed to evaluate the effect of preoperative biopsy on recurrence risk with adjustment for potential confounders. Among these patients, 202 (63%) underwent IOB, 66 (20%) underwent PNB, and 54 (17%) underwent bronchoscopic biopsy. DFS of patients who had preoperative PNB or bronchoscopic biopsy was similar to those who had IOB (P=0.514 and 0.869). Neither preoperative PNB nor transbronchial biopsy significantly affected recurrence incidence across all the relevant subgroups. Furthermore, multivariate analysis showed that preoperative biopsy was not associated with increased recurrence risk in NSCLC patients with adjustment for confounders, while squamous cell carcinoma and adjuvant chemotherapy were associated with prolonged DFS. Neither preoperative PNB nor bronchoscopic biopsy increased the recurrence risk in patients with resected stage I NSCLC, indicating that these procedures could be safely used for diagnosis of early-stage NSCLC. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 11 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 18% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 9% |
| Professor | 1 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 9% |
| Researcher | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 4 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 27% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 18% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 9% |
| Engineering | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 4 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 July 2018.
All research outputs
#20,525,274
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Management and Research
#1,406
of 2,019 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#287,609
of 328,119 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Management and Research
#56
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,019 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,119 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.