...
首页> 外文期刊>Cancer Management and Research >Meta-analysis of comparing part-solid and pure-solid tumors in patients with clinical stage IA non-small-cell lung cancer in the eighth edition TNM classification
【24h】

Meta-analysis of comparing part-solid and pure-solid tumors in patients with clinical stage IA non-small-cell lung cancer in the eighth edition TNM classification

机译:第八版TNM分类中临床IA期非小细胞肺癌患者部分实体瘤和纯实体瘤比较的Meta分析

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Objective: The aim of the study was to compare the prognoses between part-solid and pure-solid tumors for clinical stage IA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients in the eighth edition TNM classification. Methods: We searched the literature in PubMed and Web of Science for all eligible articles published before November 31, 2018. The pooled data included overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). The hazard ratio (HR) of OS (pure-solid/part-solid) was used as the measure of differential effects. Pure-solid or part-solid tumors in all studies included were matched according to the solid component size or according to the eighth edition TNM classification. Results: Seven studies including 2,037 patients with c-stage IA NSCLC were pooled in the meta-analysis. Patients with pure-solid tumors had significantly poorer OS (HR 1.69, 95% CI 1.21?2.35, P =0.002), DFS (HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.07?1.51, P =0.006) and RFS (HR 1.74, 95% CI 1.08?2.80, P =0.020). In subgroup analyses, when the meta-analysis was limited to T1a-1b (≤2 cm) lung cancer, the prognosis for pure-solid tumors was inferior to that for part-solid tumors regarding both OS and RFS. In adenocarcinoma subgroup, there was no difference between the two groups in terms of OS and RFS, but we detected a meaningful difference in DFS. Conclusion: Part-solid tumors may have a better prognosis than pure-solid tumors in clinical stage IA patients according to the eighth edition TNM classification, and similar results were found for the T1a-1b (≤2 cm) subgroup. There were no substantial differences in OS and RFS between two groups in lung adenocarcinoma. However, we detected a meaningful difference in DFS, which might also suggest a superior prognosis for part-solid tumors. We propose that the part-solid and pure-solid tumors in the same T component category be considered separately.
机译:目的:本研究的目的是比较第八版TNM分类中IA期临床非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)患者的部分实体瘤和纯实体瘤的预后。方法:我们在PubMed和Web of Science中检索了2018年11月31日之前发表的所有合格文章的文献。汇总的数据包括总体生存期(OS),无病生存期(DFS)和无复发生存期(RFS)。 OS(纯固体/部分固体)的危险比(HR)用作差异效应的量度。根据固体成分大小或第八版TNM分类,对所有纳入的纯实体或部分实体肿瘤进行匹配。结果:荟萃分析汇总了七项研究,包括2,037例c期IA非小细胞肺癌患者。纯实体瘤患者的OS(HR 1.69,95%CI 1.21?2.35,P = 0.002),DFS(HR 1.27,95%CI 1.07?1.51,P = 0.006)和RFS(HR 1.74,95%)明显较差。 CI1.08≤2.80,P = 0.020)。在亚组分析中,当荟萃分析仅限于T1a-1b(≤2cm)肺癌时,就OS和RFS而言,纯实体瘤的预后均低于部分实体瘤的预后。在腺癌亚组中,两组在OS和RFS方面无差异,但我们发现DFS有有意义的差异。结论:根据第八版TNM分类,部分实体瘤在IA期临床患者中可能比纯实体瘤更好的预后,对于T1a-1b(≤2cm)亚组也发现了类似的结果。两组在肺腺癌的OS和RFS方面无显着差异。但是,我们检测到DFS有有意义的差异,这也可能提示部分实体瘤的预后较好。我们建议分别考虑同一T组分类别中的部分实体瘤和纯实体瘤。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号