| Literature DB >> 33569324 |
Xiayi Lv1, Zhigang Wu1, Jinlin Cao1, Yeji Hu1, Kai Liu2, Xiaona Dai3, Xiaoshuai Yuan1, Yiqing Wang1, Kui Zhao4, Wang Lv1, Jian Hu1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Accurately predicting the risk level for a lymph node metastasis is critical in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study aimed to construct a novel nomogram to identify patients with a risk of lymph node metastasis in T1-2 NSCLC based on positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and clinical characteristics.Entities:
Keywords: Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); lymph node status; model; nomogram; positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT)
Year: 2021 PMID: 33569324 PMCID: PMC7867781 DOI: 10.21037/tlcr-20-1026
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Transl Lung Cancer Res ISSN: 2218-6751
Patient characteristics and univariate analysis of the risk of lymph node metastasis
| Variables | Primary cohort (n=318) | Validation cohort (n=156) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Node negative (%) | Node positive (%) | P | Node negative (%) | Node positive (%) | P | ||
| Sex | 0.011 | 0.327 | |||||
| Male | 89 (43.4) | 66 (58.4) | 59 (52.7) | 27 (61.4) | |||
| Female | 116 (56.6) | 47 (41.6) | 53 (47.3) | 17 (38.6) | |||
| Age, year | 0.003 | 0.762 | |||||
| Mean (SD) | 63.9 (9.6) | 60.5 (9.4) | 63.2 (8.6) | 62.7 (9.7) | |||
| Tumor location | <0.001 | 0.021 | |||||
| Peripheral | 189 (92.2) | 73 (64.6) | 97 (86.6) | 31 (70.5) | |||
| Central | 16 (7.8) | 40 (35.4) | 15 (13.4) | 13 (29.5) | |||
| Smoking history | 0.072 | 0.266 | |||||
| No | 137 (66.8) | 64 (56.6) | 62 (55.4) | 20 (45.5) | |||
| Yes | 68 (33.2) | 49 (43.4) | 50 (44.6) | 24 (54.5) | |||
| Tumor size, cm | <0.001 | 0.004 | |||||
| Mean (SD) | 2.2 (1.1) | 2.9 (0.8) | 2.5 (1.3) | 3.8 (3.4) | |||
| Histology | 0.637 | 0.049 | |||||
| Adenocarcinoma | 165 (80.5) | 87 (77.0) | 93 (83.0) | 31 (70.5) | |||
| Squamous cell carcinoma | 25 (12.2) | 18 (15.9) | 16 (14.3) | 9 (20.5) | |||
| Other | 15 (7.3) | 8 (7.1) | 3 (2.7) | 4 (9.1) | |||
| Tumor grade | <0.001 | 0.026 | |||||
| Well | 26 (12.7) | 0 (0.0) | 10 (8.9) | 0 (0.0) | |||
| Moderate | 105 (51.5) | 31 (27.7) | 67 (59.8) | 24 (54.5) | |||
| Poor | 73 (35.8) | 81 (72.3) | 35 (31.3) | 20 (45.5) | |||
| Lymph node short axis, cm | <0.001 | 0.003 | |||||
| Mean (SD) | 0.5 (0.4) | 0.8 (0.5) | 0.8 (0.4) | 1.0 (0.4) | |||
| Tumor SUVmax value | <0.001 | <0.001 | |||||
| Mean (SD) | 4.7 (4.7) | 9.2 (4.4) | 5.6 (4.3) | 8.7 (4.5) | |||
| Lymph node SUVmax value | <0.001 | <0.001 | |||||
| Mean (SD) | 1.7 (2.0) | 4.0 (3.1) | 2.1 (2.0) | 3.8 (3.2) | |||
| CEA value, ng/mL | 0.003 | 0.030 | |||||
| Mean (SD) | 5.0 (7.0) | 8.1 (9.5) | 5.5 (9.3) | 12.4 (23.7) | |||
| Neutrophil/lymphocyte value | 0.200 | 0.487 | |||||
| Mean (SD) | 2.2 (1.1) | 2.4 (1.2) | 3.0 (3.2) | 2.7 (2.1) | |||
| Ground glass opacity | 0.997 | 0.998 | |||||
| No | 149 (72.7) | 113 (100.0) | 97 (86.6) | 44 (100.0) | |||
| Yes | 56 (27.3) | 0 (0.0) | 15 (13.4) | 0 (0.0) | |||
P value is derived from the univariable analyses between each variable and node status.
The variables identified by logistic multivariable regression analysis
| Variables | Multivariable analysis | Selected factors for model | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | 95% CI | P | OR | 95% CI | P | ||
| Sex | 0.768 | ||||||
| Male | Reference | ||||||
| Female | 0.865 | 0.304–2.464 | |||||
| Age, years | 0.953 | 0.921–0.988 | 0.008 | 0.953 | 0.922–0.986 | 0.006 | |
| Tumor location | <0.001 | <0.001 | |||||
| Peripheral | Reference | Reference | |||||
| Central | 7.018 | 2.687–18.330 | 8.637 | 3.378–22.082 | |||
| Smoking history | 0.871 | ||||||
| No | Reference | ||||||
| Yes | 0.918 | 0.326–2.585 | |||||
| Tumor size, cm | 1.112 | 0.772–1.603 | 0.569 | ||||
| Histology | 0.007 | 0.003 | |||||
| Adenocarcinoma | Reference | Reference | |||||
| Squamous cell carcinoma | 0.201 | 0.063–0.646 | 0.007 | 0.175 | 0.057–0.538 | 0.002 | |
| Other | 0.193 | 0.050–0.743 | 0.017 | 0.210 | 0.058–0.757 | 0.017 | |
| Tumor grade | 0.150 | ||||||
| Well | Reference | ||||||
| Moderate | – | – | 0.998 | ||||
| Poor | – | – | 0.998 | ||||
| Lymph node short axis, cm | 1.106 | 0.528–2.318 | 0.790 | ||||
| Tumor SUVmax value | 1.126 | 1.040–1.220 | 0.004 | 1.185 | 1.106–1.269 | <0.001 | |
| Lymph node SUVmax value | 1.436 | 1.201–1.718 | <0.001 | 1.476 | 1.225–1.640 | <0.001 | |
| CEA value, ng/mL | 1.038 | 0.995–1.084 | 0.087 | 1.047 | 1.009–1.087 | 0.015 | |
OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen.
Figure 1Nomogram for predicting the risk of lymph nodes metastasis in non-small-cell lung cancer. The value of each variable was given a score on the point scale axis. A total score could be easily calculated by adding every single score and, by projecting the total score to the lower total point scale, we were able to estimate the probability of lymph nodes metastasis.
Figure 2The calibration curves for the nomogram. (A) Primary cohort; (B) validation cohort. The x-axis represents the nomogram predicted probability, and the y-axis represents the actual probability of lymph nodes metastasis. A perfect prediction would correspond to the diagonal blue solid line. The red dashed line represents the performance of the nomogram, of which a closer fit to the diagonal line represents a better prediction.
Figure 3Decision curve analysis for the nomogram. The y-axis measures the net benefit. The red line represents the nomogram. The blue line represents the assumption that all patients have lymph nodes metastasis. The green line represents the assumption that no patients have lymph nodes metastasis. The net benefit was calculated by subtracting the proportion of all patients who are false positive from the proportion, which is a true positive.