Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Dec 1:2019:6263249.
doi: 10.1155/2019/6263249. eCollection 2019.

Preoperative Risk Assessment of Lymph Node Metastasis in cT1 Lung Cancer: A Retrospective Study from Eastern China

Affiliations

Preoperative Risk Assessment of Lymph Node Metastasis in cT1 Lung Cancer: A Retrospective Study from Eastern China

Chengyan Zhang et al. J Immunol Res. .

Abstract

Background: Lymph node status of clinical T1 (diameter ≤ 3 cm) lung cancer largely affects the treatment strategies in the clinic. In order to assess lymph node status before operation, we aim to develop a noninvasive predictive model using preoperative clinical information.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 924 patients (development group) and 380 patients (validation group) of clinical T1 lung cancer. Univariate analysis followed by polytomous logistic regression was performed to estimate different risk factors of lymph node metastasis between N1 and N2 diseases. A predictive model of N2 metastasis was established with dichotomous logistic regression, externally validated and compared with previous models.

Results: Consolidation size and clinical N stage based on CT were two common independent risk factors for both N1 and N2 metastases, with different odds ratios. For N2 metastasis, we identified five independent predictors by dichotomous logistic regression: peripheral location, larger consolidation size, lymph node enlargement on CT, no smoking history, and higher levels of serum CEA. The model showed good calibration and discrimination ability in the development data, with the reasonable Hosmer-Lemeshow test (p = 0.839) and the area under the ROC being 0.931 (95% CI: 0.906-0.955). When externally validated, the model showed a great negative predictive value of 97.6% and the AUC of our model was better than other models.

Conclusion: In this study, we analyzed risk factors for both N1 and N2 metastases and built a predictive model to evaluate possibilities of N2 metastasis of clinical T1 lung cancers before the surgery. Our model will help to select patients with low probability of N2 metastasis and assist in clinical decision to further management.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart of patient selection and exclusion.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Nomogram predicting the likelihood of N2 metastasis in early lung cancers (tumor ≤ 3 cm). According to the location of value from the 2nd to the 6th axis, we can get the vertically corresponding points on the first axis. By summing up each points, we get a total point, and the vertically corresponding predicted value on the last axis shows the predicted possibility of N2 metastasis.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Calibration curve of the logistic regression model. The red line indicated a perfect prediction of observed possibilities. The black line represented the entire development group (n = 924).
Figure 4
Figure 4
The receiver operating characteristic curve for the development and validation groups. (a) The ROC curve for the development group. The AUC was 0.931 (95% CI: 0.906-0.955). (b) The ROC curve for the validation group. The AUC was 0.906 (95% CI: 0.857-0.956).
Figure 5
Figure 5
Comparison of our model and other published models using data from the same validation group. (a) Comparison with Zang et al. (2017) in cT1NxM0 patients. The AUC was 0.879 validated by our data (95% CI: 0.821-0.937). DeLong test for comparing two ROC curves: p = 0.405. (b) Comparison of our model with Zhang et al. (2012) in cT1N0M0 patients. The AUC was 0.712 validated by our data (95% CI: 0.602-0.822). DeLong test for comparing two ROC curves: p = 0.002.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Bilfinger T., Keresztes R., Albano D., Nemesure B. Five-year survival among stage IIIA lung cancer patients receiving two different treatment modalities. Medical Science Monitor. 2016;22:2589–2594. doi: 10.12659/msm.898675. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. van Meerkbeeck J., Van Schil P., Kramer G., et al. Pr5 A randomized trial of radical surgery (S) versus thoracicradiotherapy (TRT) in patients (pts) with stage IIIA-N2 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after response to induction chemotherapy (ICT) (EORTC 08941) Lung Cancer. 2005;49, article S4(Supplement 2) doi: 10.1016/S0169-5002(05)80131-X. - DOI
    1. Albain K. S., Swann R. S., Rusch V. R., et al. Phase III study of concurrent chemotherapy and radiotherapy (CT/RT) vs CT/RT followed by surgical resection for stage IIIA(pN2) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): outcomes update of North American Intergroup 0139 (RTOG 9309) Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2005;23(16):7014–7014. doi: 10.1200/jco.2005.23.16_suppl.7014. - DOI
    1. Bueno R., Richards W. G., Swanson S. J., et al. Nodal stage after induction therapy for stage IIIA lung cancer determines patient survival. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery. 2000;70(6):1826–1831. doi: 10.1016/s0003-4975(00)01585-x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Betticher D. C., Hsu Schmitz S. F., Tötsch M., et al. Mediastinal lymph node clearance after docetaxel-cisplatin neoadjuvant chemotherapy is prognostic of survival in patients with stage IIIA pN2 non-small-cell lung cancer: a multicenter phase II trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2003;21(9):1752–1759. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2003.11.040. - DOI - PubMed