↓ Skip to main content

Influence of Extent of Lymph Node Evaluation on Survival for Pathologically Lymph Node Negative Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Clinical Oncology: Cancer Clinical Trials, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Influence of Extent of Lymph Node Evaluation on Survival for Pathologically Lymph Node Negative Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer
Published in
American Journal of Clinical Oncology: Cancer Clinical Trials, August 2018
DOI 10.1097/coc.0000000000000379
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel J Becker, Benjamin P Levy, Heather T Gold, Scott E Sherman, Danil V Makarov, David Schreiber, Juan P Wisnivesky, Harvey I Pass

Abstract

Despite previous retrospective reports that the number of lymph nodes resected at curative intent surgery for lung cancer correlates with overall survival (OS), no consensus exists regarding the minimal nor optimal number of lymph nodes to resect at curative lung cancer surgery. We studied subjects in the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results Database (SEER) diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer between 2000 and 2011 who underwent either lobectomy or pneumonectomy and had pathologic negative nodal evaluation. We excluded patients with sublobar resection and/or no lymph node evaluation. We examined associations between number of lymph nodes evaluated and OS/lung cancer-specific survival by multivariable Cox regression; and predictors of evaluation of more lymph nodes. Among the 33,463 patients in our sample, a median of 7 lymph nodes were evaluated. We found that lung cancer-specific survival and OS improved with increasing lymph node evaluation up to 16 to 18 lymph nodes (hazard ratio, 0.77 [95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.85] and 0.78 [95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.86], respectively). There was little additional improvement in outcomes with evaluation of >16 to 18 lymph nodes. Blacks, Hispanics, females, and patients from distinct geographical regions were less likely to have 16 or more lymph nodes evaluated. There was a consistently increasing survival benefit associated with a more extensive lymph node evaluation at lung cancer resection, up to 16 to 18 lymph nodes removed. The median number of nodes evaluated was, however, only 7, suggesting that setting a goal of ≥16 examined lymph nodes may lead to improved survival outcomes, and reduce disparities in care.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 5 28%
Researcher 3 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Other 1 6%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 3 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 11%
Engineering 1 6%
Unknown 6 33%
Attention Score in Context

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 26 July 2018.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Clinical Oncology: Cancer Clinical Trials
#969
of 1,754 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#249,775
of 341,861 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Clinical Oncology: Cancer Clinical Trials
#18
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,754 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 341,861 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.