↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of new classifications of N descriptor in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) based on the number and the ratio of metastatic lymph nodes

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
6 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
Evaluation of new classifications of N descriptor in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) based on the number and the ratio of metastatic lymph nodes
Published in
Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13019-016-0456-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Konrad Pawełczyk, Konrad Pawełczyk, Marek Marciniak, Piotr Błasiak

Abstract

The aim of the study was to evaluate the prognostic power of new classifications of N descriptor created basing on the number (NLN) and the ratio of metastatic lymph nodes (RLN) in NSCLC compared to the current classification (CLN). The data of 529 patients with NSCLC operated with the intention of radical resection, were analyzed. The new categories of N descriptor were created as follows: 1) NLN - median number of metastatic nodes was 3, thus in NLN0 the number of metastatic nodes =0, in NLN1 1-2, in NLN2 ≥ 3, 2) RLN - median ratio (number of metastatic lymph nodes to all nodes removed) was 12.4 %, thus in RLN0 the ratio was 0, in RLN1 < 13 %, in RLN2 > 13 %. The prognostic value of each classification was calculated on the basis of hazard ratios defined in multivariate Cox proportional hazard model. The new classifications of N descriptor turned out to be an independent strong prognostic factor (p <0.001) with a 5-year survival rate NLN0-62 %, NLN1-39 %, NLN2-26 % and RLN0-62 %, RLN1-37 % and RLN2-26 %. For 5-year survival rates in CLN0-62 %, CLN1-42 %, CLN2-24 % (p < 0.001), a higher prognostic value of new classifications was not demonstrated, the hazard ratio amounted to 2.22, 2.08, 2.49 for NLN2, RLN2 and CLN2 respectively. Despite the significantly high prognostic power, the new classifications cannot be considered superior over CLN. There are some deficiencies in the current classification, therefore further studies on its improvement are needed.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 33%
Professor 1 17%
Student > Bachelor 1 17%
Student > Master 1 17%
Other 1 17%
Other 0 0%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 67%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 17%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 17%

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 20 April 2016.
All research outputs
#6,562,089
of 7,578,098 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
#200
of 303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,123
of 267,247 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
#10
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,578,098 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 303 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. 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 267,247 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 15 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.