Abstract 493P
Background
Mediastinal lymph node dissection (MLND) is a crucial procedure during non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) resection, but the prognostic value of 4L lymph node dissection ( 4L-LND) continues to be controversial. Here, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the associations of 4L-LND with short- and long- term survival outcomes in surgically treated NSCLC patients.
Methods
We systematically searched studies from PubMed, Embase, and the Corchrane Library up to May 1, 2023. Studies investigating the prognostic value of 4L-LND and non-4L-LND on NSCLC survival were included. Data for analysis mainly included postoperative complications, overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) to evaluate the quality of the included studies. The Q-test and I2-test were used to assess heterogeneity. The stability of pooled HRs was examined by sensitivity analysis.
Results
ix retrospective studies with a total of 4565 NSCLC patients who received 4L-LND or did not receive 4L-LND were included. The 4L-LND group had a significantly better OS (HR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.61–0.91, P = 0.004) and DFS (HR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.66–0.88, P = 0.0002) than the non-4L-LND group, especially in the subgroup analysis of PSM studies. Although no significant difference in chest tube drainage for more than 7 days rate (RR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.31–3.08, P = 0.97), hoarseness rate (RR = 1.60, 95% CI: 0.53–4.87, P = 0.51), and chylothorax rate (RR = 1.28, 95% CI: 0.58–2.84, P = 0.54) was observed, however, those who received 4L-LND had a higher total postoperative complication rate than those who did not (RR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.09–1.67, P = 0.006). There was no significant heterogeneity during our analysis, and no potential publication bias was observed among these studies.
Conclusions
Our meta-analysis showed that the 4L-LND group was significantly associated with both survival outcomes and postoperative complications compared to the non-4L-LND group in treating NSCLC patients. However, more prospective clinical trials should be well-designed to evaluate our conclusion due to the lack of guideline surpport.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
W. Li.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
602P - COLUMBUS 7-year update: A randomized, open-label, phase III trial of encorafenib (Enco) + binimetinib (Bini) vs vemurafenib (Vemu) or Enco in patients (Pts) with BRAF V600-mutant melanoma
Presenter: Andrew Haydon
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
603P - An individualised postoperative radiological surveillance schedule for IDH-wildtype glioblastoma patients (HK-GBM Registry)
Presenter: Jason Chak Yan Li
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
604P - Cabozantinib versus placebo in patients with radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer who progressed after prior VEGFR-targeted therapy: Outcomes from COSMIC-311 by BRAF status
Presenter: Marcia Brose
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
606P - BRAF and NRAS mutations are associated with poor prognosis in Asians with acral-lentiginous and nodular cutaneous melanoma
Presenter: Sumadi Lukman Anwar
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
607P - Single institutional outcomes of radiotherapy and systemic therapy for melanoma brain metastases in Japan
Presenter: Naoya Yamazaki
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
608P - The efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapy in mucosal melanomas: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Presenter: Andrea Teo
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
609P - The association between thyroid function abnormalities and vitiligo induced by pembrolizumab regarding prognosis in patients with advanced melanoma
Presenter: Moez Mobarek
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
610P - Analyzing the clinical benefit of the evidence presented at these congresses and utilizing a standardized scale to quantify it will significantly enhance our understanding of the studies showcased, allowing for more objective evaluation and interpretation
Presenter: Charles Jeffrey Tan
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
611P - ESMO-magnitude of clinical benefit scale (MCBS) scores for phase III trials of adjuvant and curative therapies at the 2022 ASCO annual meeting (ASCO22)
Presenter: Thi Thao Vi Luong
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract
612P - Is the juice worth the squeeze? Overall survival gain per unit treatment time as a metric of clinical benefit of systemic treatment in incurable cancers
Presenter: Vodathi Bamunuarachchi
Session: Poster Display
Resources:
Abstract