Back to Journals » Cancer Management and Research » Volume 11

Meta-analysis of comparing part-solid and pure-solid tumors in patients with clinical stage IA non-small-cell lung cancer in the eighth edition TNM classification

Authors Jiang T, Li M, Lin M, Zhao M, Zhan C, Feng M

Received 30 November 2018

Accepted for publication 25 February 2019

Published 10 April 2019 Volume 2019:11 Pages 2951—2961

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S196613

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewers approved by Dr Andrew Yee

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Professor Nakshatri


Tian Jiang, Ming Li, Miao Lin, Mengnan Zhao, Cheng Zhan, Mingxiang Feng

Department of Thoracic Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, People’s Republic of China

Objective: The aim of the study was to compare the prognoses between part-solid and pure-solid tumors for clinical stage IA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients in the eighth edition TNM classification.
Methods: We searched the literature in PubMed and Web of Science for all eligible articles published before November 31, 2018. The pooled data included overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). The hazard ratio (HR) of OS (pure-solid/part-solid) was used as the measure of differential effects. Pure-solid or part-solid tumors in all studies included were matched according to the solid component size or according to the eighth edition TNM classification.
Results: Seven studies including 2,037 patients with c-stage IA NSCLC were pooled in the meta-analysis. Patients with pure-solid tumors had significantly poorer OS (HR 1.69, 95% CI 1.21‒2.35, P=0.002), DFS (HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.07‒1.51, P=0.006) and RFS (HR 1.74, 95% CI 1.08‒2.80, P=0.020). In subgroup analyses, when the meta-analysis was limited to T1a-1b (≤2 cm) lung cancer, the prognosis for pure-solid tumors was inferior to that for part-solid tumors regarding both OS and RFS. In adenocarcinoma subgroup, there was no difference between the two groups in terms of OS and RFS, but we detected a meaningful difference in DFS.
Conclusion: Part-solid tumors may have a better prognosis than pure-solid tumors in clinical stage IA patients according to the eighth edition TNM classification, and similar results were found for the T1a-1b (≤2 cm) subgroup. There were no substantial differences in OS and RFS between two groups in lung adenocarcinoma. However, we detected a meaningful difference in DFS, which might also suggest a superior prognosis for part-solid tumors. We propose that the part-solid and pure-solid tumors in the same T component category be considered separately.

Keywords: part-solid, pure-solid, stage IA, adenocarcinoma, lung cancer, meta-analysis


Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]