| Title |
Impact of number versus location of metastases on survival in stage IV M1b non-small cell lung cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Medical Oncology, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12032-018-1182-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amanda Jane Williams Gibson, Haocheng Li, Adrijana D’Silva, Roxana A. Tudor, Anifat A. Elegbede, Shannon Mary Otsuka, D. Gwyn Bebb, Winson Y. Cheung |
| Abstract |
To assess the impact of location versus number of extra-pulmonary metastatic sites (EPMS) on survival in stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Retrospective analysis was conducted on patients diagnosed during 1999-2013 with stage IV, M1b (AJCC 7th edition) NSCLC using the large, institutional Glans-Look Database, which contains patient demographic, clinical, pathological, treatment, and outcome information. We assessed the impact of location and number of EPMS and identified correlates of overall survival using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression. We identified a total of 2065 NSCLC patients with EPMS. Median age was 67 (IQR 58-75) years, 52% were men, and 78% were current or former smokers. 60% had one EPMS, and 40% had two or more EPMS. Among those with only one EPMS, most frequent organ involvement included bone (40%), brain (32%), and liver (13%). Median overall survival (mOS) was worst in those with liver metastasis and best in those with adrenal metastasis (2.0 vs. 5.2 months, p = 0.015). However, outcomes based on site of organ involvement were not significantly different in multivariable analysis. Compared to patients with one EPMS, individuals with two or more EPMS experienced worse outcomes (mOS ≤ 2.9 vs. 3.9 months, p < 0.001), and were associated with worse prognosis in Cox regression analysis (HR 1.5, 95% CI 1.3-1.7, p < 0.001). Number rather than location of EPMS is a prognostic factor in patients with stage IV M1b NSCLC. This information is relevant for accurate prognostication, stratification of participants in future clinical trials, and timely and appropriate advanced care planning. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 13% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Researcher | 3 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 14 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Mathematics | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 15 | 48% |
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 04 August 2018.
All research outputs
#20,529,173
of 23,098,660 outputs
Outputs from Medical Oncology
#968
of 1,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#288,972
of 331,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Oncology
#15
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,098,660 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 1,303 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. 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 331,122 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 19 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.