Vignesh Raman1, Oliver K Jawitz2, Soraya L Voigt2, Kristen E Rhodin2, Thomas A D'Amico2, David H Harpole2, Chi-Fu Jeffrey Yang3, Betty C Tong2. 1. Division of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC. Electronic address: vignesh.raman@duke.edu. 2. Division of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC. 3. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, Palo Alto, CA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The interaction between tumor size and the comparative prognosis of lobar and sublobar resection has been defined poorly. RESEARCH QUESTION: The purpose of this study was to characterize the relationship between tumor size and the receipt of segmentectomy or lobectomy in association with overall survival in patients with clinically node-negative non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The 2004-2015 National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for patients with cT1-3N0M0 NSCLC who underwent segmentectomy or lobectomy without neoadjuvant therapy or missing survival data. The primary outcome was overall survival, which was evaluated using multivariate Cox proportional hazards including an interaction term between tumor size and type of surgery. RESULTS: A total of 143,040 patients were included: 135,446 (95%) underwent lobectomy and 7594 (5%) underwent segmentectomy. In multivariate Cox regression, a significant three-way interaction was found among tumor size, histologic results, and type of surgery (P < .001). When patients were stratified by histologic results, lobectomy was associated with significantly improved survival compared with segmentectomy beyond a tumor size of approximately 10 mm for adenocarcinoma and 15 mm for squamous cell carcinoma that was recapitulated in subgroup analyses. No interaction between tumor size and type of surgery was found for patients with neuroendocrine tumors. INTERPRETATION: In this NCDB study of patients with node-negative NSCLC, we found different tumor size thresholds, based on histologic results, that identified populations of patients who least and most benefitted from lobectomy compared with segmentectomy.
BACKGROUND: The interaction between tumor size and the comparative prognosis of lobar and sublobar resection has been defined poorly. RESEARCH QUESTION: The purpose of this study was to characterize the relationship between tumor size and the receipt of segmentectomy or lobectomy in association with overall survival in patients with clinically node-negative non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The 2004-2015 National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for patients with cT1-3N0M0 NSCLC who underwent segmentectomy or lobectomy without neoadjuvant therapy or missing survival data. The primary outcome was overall survival, which was evaluated using multivariate Cox proportional hazards including an interaction term between tumor size and type of surgery. RESULTS: A total of 143,040 patients were included: 135,446 (95%) underwent lobectomy and 7594 (5%) underwent segmentectomy. In multivariate Cox regression, a significant three-way interaction was found among tumor size, histologic results, and type of surgery (P < .001). When patients were stratified by histologic results, lobectomy was associated with significantly improved survival compared with segmentectomy beyond a tumor size of approximately 10 mm for adenocarcinoma and 15 mm for squamous cell carcinoma that was recapitulated in subgroup analyses. No interaction between tumor size and type of surgery was found for patients with neuroendocrine tumors. INTERPRETATION: In this NCDB study of patients with node-negative NSCLC, we found different tumor size thresholds, based on histologic results, that identified populations of patients who least and most benefitted from lobectomy compared with segmentectomy.
Authors: Nasser K Altorki; Xiaofei Wang; Dennis Wigle; Lin Gu; Gail Darling; Ahmad S Ashrafi; Rodney Landrenau; Daniel Miller; Moishe Liberman; David R Jones; Robert Keenan; Massimo Conti; Gavin Wright; Linda J Veit; Suresh S Ramalingam; Mohamed Kamel; Harvey I Pass; John D Mitchell; Thomas Stinchcombe; Everett Vokes; Leslie J Kohman Journal: Lancet Respir Med Date: 2018-11-12 Impact factor: 30.700
Authors: Bryan A Whitson; Shawn S Groth; Rafael S Andrade; Michael A Maddaus; Elizabeth B Habermann; Jonathan D'Cunha Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2011-10-01 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Michiel A Ijsseldijk; Melina Shoni; Charles Siegert; Jan Seegers; Anton K C van Engelenburg; Thomas C Tsai; Abraham Lebenthal; Richard P G Ten Broek Journal: Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2019-08-09
Authors: Ze-Rui Zhao; Dong-Rong Situ; Rainbow W H Lau; Tony S K Mok; George G Chen; Malcolm J Underwood; Calvin S H Ng Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2017-01-20 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Mohamed K Kamel; Mohamed Rahouma; Benjamin Lee; Sebron W Harrison; Brendon M Stiles; Nasser K Altorki; Jeffrey L Port Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2018-09-19 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Mohammad R Ghamati; Wilson W L Li; Erik H F M van der Heijden; Ad F T M Verhagen; Ronald A Damhuis Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2021-10 Impact factor: 3.005