Outcomes in Incidentally Versus Screening Detected Stage I Lung Cancer Surgery Patients
Journal of Thoracic Oncology, ISSN: 1556-0864, Vol: 19, Issue: 4, Page: 581-588
2024
- 6Citations
- 18Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations6
- Citation Indexes6
- CrossRef1
- Captures18
- Readers18
- 18
- Mentions1
- News Mentions1
- 1
Most Recent News
New Lung Cancer Study Findings Have Been Reported from Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (Outcomes In Incidentally Versus Screening Detected Stage I Lung Cancer Surgery Patients)
2024 JUN 17 (NewsRx) -- By a News Reporter-Staff News Editor at Cancer Daily -- Researchers detail new data in Oncology - Lung Cancer. According
Article Description
Although the importance of lung cancer screening for early diagnosis is established, because of poor enrollment, incidental findings still play a role in diagnosis of patients who qualify. Nevertheless, analysis of this incidental cohort is lacking. We present a retrospective analysis comparing patients with thoracic surgery with incidental versus screening detected stage I lung cancer. Thoracic surgery cases at Mount Sinai Hospital from March, 1, 2012, to June, 30, 2022, were queried for patients eligible for lung cancer screening and a stage I diagnosis. The basis of lung nodule detection (incidental versus screening detected) was identified. We compared demographic variables, comorbidities, tumor staging, procedure details, and postoperative outcomes between the cohorts. Of the patients eligible for screening with lung cancer resection and stage I diagnosis at Mount Sinai, 153 were identified incidentally and 67 through screening. The patients in the incidental cohort were older ( p = 0.005), more likely to have quit smoking ( p = 0.04), and had a greater number of comorbidities ( p = 0.0002). There was no statistically significant difference between the groups with regard to pack-year smoking history, lung cancer histological type, location or size of tumor, and surgical approach, length of surgery or stay, number of postoperative outcomes, and survival. In stage I lung cancers, no significant differences were identified between incidentally and screening detected lung nodules with regard to tumor characteristics, surgical approach, and postoperative outcomes. Imaging conducted for other reasons should be considered as a valid and important diagnostic tool, similar to traditional low-dose computed tomography, in patients who qualify for screening.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S155608642302364X; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2023.11.008; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85179163494&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37977487; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S155608642302364X; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2023.11.008
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know