重点号专题·呼吸系统疾病
非小细胞肺癌根治术后复发转移危险因素研究进展
中国医学前沿杂志(电子版), 2023,15(1) : 40-45. DOI: 10.12037/YXQY.2023.01-09
摘要

根治性手术是非小细胞肺癌(non-small cell lung cancer,NSCLC)的重要治疗手段之一,目前辅助治疗及预后的判断主要依赖肿瘤原发灶-淋巴结-转移(tumor,node and metastasis,TNM)分期,随着肿瘤检测及治疗手段的不断更新,越来越多的临床、病理、分子、影像预后因素被发现及识别,本文对上述因素的研究进展进行综述,这些因素可能有助于指导区分获益辅助治疗的高危人群,并在未来成为NSCLC根治术后复发转移风险评估的重要部分。

引用本文: 袁月, 李琳. 非小细胞肺癌根治术后复发转移危险因素研究进展 [J] . 中国医学前沿杂志(电子版), 2023, 15(1) : 40-45. DOI: 10.12037/YXQY.2023.01-09.
参考文献导出:   Endnote    NoteExpress    RefWorks    NoteFirst    医学文献王
扫  描  看  全  文

正文
作者信息
基金 0  关键词  0
English Abstract
评论
阅读 0  评论  0
相关资源
引用 | 论文 | 视频

本刊版权归人民卫生出版社有限公司所有。任何机构或个人欲转发本刊图文,请与本刊联系。凡未经授权而转载、摘编本刊文章者,本刊将保留追究其法律责任的权利。

肺癌是目前最常见的恶性肿瘤之一,也是癌症死亡的主要原因之一,其中非小细胞肺癌(non-small cell lung cancer,NSCLC)患者约占肺癌患者总数的85%[1]。对于Ⅰ~Ⅲ A级部分Ⅲ B(T3N2M0)NSCLC患者来说,根治手术结合新辅助放化疗或辅助放化疗是最佳治疗选择[2]。根据术后分期的不同,Ⅰ期、Ⅱ期、Ⅲ期的5年生存率分别在73%~90%、56%~65%、12%~41%[3]。虽然随着治疗手段的不断进步,NSCLC的死亡率逐渐下降,但根治术后的复发及转移仍是肿瘤治疗失败的重要原因,对根治术后的预后高危因素研究也是肿瘤外科及肿瘤内科医生共同关注的焦点,本文现对NSCLC根治术后转移复发的危险因素研究进展进行综述。

1 临床因素

在众多与预后可能相关的临床因素中,得到比较充分研究的是年龄、性别、吸烟史。高龄是NSCLC术后早期死亡的独立预测因素[4,5]。对于同样分期的NSCLC的女性和男性患者来说,女性具有更好的预后[6],瑞典的全国性观察性队列研究显示,女性患者的术后死亡风险较低,风险比率(hazard ratio,HR)为0.73(95%CI:0.67~0.79)[7]。与曾经吸烟或不吸烟的人相比,确诊时吸烟的人预后较差,不吸烟者优势比(odds ratio,OR)为0.3(95%CI:0.1~0.9)[8],Sheikh等[9]最近的一项前瞻性研究表明,诊断后戒烟可延长总生存期(overall survival,OS)(6.6年vs.4.8年,P=0.001)和提高5年无进展生存率(54.4% vs.43.8%,P=0.004)。

营养状况与肺癌的远期生存也存在着密切关系。法国一项纳入54 631例患者的大型回顾性研究显示,体质指数(body mass index,BMI)<18.5kg/m2与较低的生存率相关(HR=1.24,95%CI:1.16~1.33),而超重人群(BMI 25.0~29.0kg/m2)和肥胖人群(BMI>29kg/m2)与生存率提高相关(HR=0.95,95%CI:0.92~0.98;HR=0.88,95%CI:0.84~0.92)[10]。同时该团队还发现手术前的低肌肉质量或肌肉减少是NSCLC根治术后预后的负性影响因素,低肌肉质量的人群对比正常人群,7年生存率分别为31.6%和50.1%(P=0.042);相反,没有低肌肉质量是独立的有利预后因素(RR=0.56,95%CI:0.37~0.87,P=0.000 91)[11]

2 病理因素

除了与预后最为相关的术后肿瘤原发灶-淋巴结-转移(tumor,node and metastasis,TNM)分期之外,目前研究证据充分的高危病理因素包括胸膜侵犯(pleural invasion,PL)、脉管侵犯(vascular invasion,VI)、气道内播散(tumor spread through air spaces,STAS)、微血管浸润(microscopic vascular invasion,MVI)等[12,13,14,15,16]。在肺腺癌病理亚型中,实性型及微乳头型是预后的不良因素,无论是否为主要成分,含有实性型及微乳头型成分的浸润性肺腺癌患者具有较高的淋巴结转移风险,并且无复发生存(disease-free survival,DFS)期更短[13,17]。早期NSCLC患者中同样发现了这一现象:一项回顾性研究显示实性型或微乳头型为主要成分对3cm以下的淋巴结阴性肺腺癌的复发有显著影响[18]。上海胸科医院的回顾性研究纳入了1 956例pT1N0M0的浸润性肺腺癌患者,结果显示含有实性成分和微乳头成分组5年DFS率有明显差异(DFS率:81.9% vs.92.2%,P<0.001)[19];多项回顾性研究显示在IB期NSCLC患者中,含有实性或微乳头成分的患者的肿瘤特异性死亡和复发累及发生率更高,在以实性成分或微乳头成分为主的患者中,辅助化疗可带来明显的生存获益[20,21,22]。除了实性型及微乳头型,研究显示筛状结构域丝分裂率更高、更高的血管侵犯和组织坏死风险有关,并与更短的DFS相关[23,24],并被2015版世界卫生组织胸部肿瘤分类病理分类列为腺泡型高级模式的一部分。一项纳入6项研究共956例IB期患者的荟萃分析得到了同样的结果[25]。以上研究也促使了新的肺腺癌病理分级系统的建立,国际肺癌研究协会病理学委员会通过一项系统研究建立了浸润性非黏液腺癌的分级模式:1级,高分化腺癌,以贴壁型为主,高级别模式(实性型、微乳头和/或复杂腺体模式)少于20%;2级,中度分化腺癌,腺泡型或乳头型为主,少于20%的高级模式;3级,低分化,任何具有20%或更多高级别模式的肿瘤[26],这一分级模式也被列入2021年世界卫生组织胸部肿瘤分类中,它能否为作为早期NSCLC的辅助化疗的筛选手段仍有待更多研究证实。

3 分子生物学因素
3.1 驱动基因表达情况

随着分子检测技术的发展,NSCLC已经进入分子分型时代,但目前表皮生长因子受体(epidermal growth factor receptor,EGFR)、间变性淋巴瘤激酶(anaplastic lymphoma kinase,ALK)、c-ros肉瘤致癌因子1(c-ros oncogene 1,ROS1)等驱动基因状态对于肺癌根治术后的预后影响尚无明确定论。

3.1.1 EGFR

已有几项研究中,EGFR状态对NSCLC术后复发转移的影响呈现了不同的结果。同时日本的两项针对术后肺腺癌人群的回顾性研究显示EGFR突变是一种保护性因素,并且外显子21突变患者的无病生存率明显优于外显子19缺失的患者[27,28]。中国一项非介入性真实世界研究纳入了472例接受手术治疗的Ⅰ~Ⅲ期肺腺癌患者,EGFR突变型患者3年DFS率显著高于野生型EGFR患者(65.6% vs.56.8%,P=0.034 7)[29]。荟萃分析显示,接受手术治疗的EGFR突变型患者具有更长的DFS期(HR=0.77,95%CI:0.66~0.90,P=0.000 1)[30]。美国一项针对Ⅰ期NSCLC的研究显示,EGFR突变患者相较于野生型患者的肿瘤与显著较低的复发率(9.7% vs.721.6%;P=0.03)、更长的中位DFS期(8.8年vs.7.0年;P=0.008 5)和更高的5年生存率(98% vs.73%;P=0.003)[31]。但同时也有研究显示EGFR可能是NSCLC术后长期复发的危险因素,日本一项研究评估了5年以上复发的早期NSCLC患者,17例复发患者中16例患者里含有驱动基因突变,其中11例为EGFR突变[32]。在一些研究中,EGFR状态与术后复发转移无关:新加坡一项队列研究EGFR阳性和野生型NSCLC的2年DFS率无统计学差异[70.2% vs.67.6%(95%CI:62.2%~72.4%);P=0.70][33]。日本一项研究聚焦Ⅰ期NSCLC术后患者,结果显示DFS在EGFR突变阳性组和阴性组之间没有差异(5年DFS率,86.8% vs.89.1%,P=0.759)[34]

3.1.2 ALK及ROS1

Chaft等[35]研究了2009年1月至2012年12月之间马萨诸塞州总医院或斯隆·凯特琳纪念癌症中心手术切除的具有EGFR或KRAS突变或ALK重排的Ⅰ~Ⅲ期NSCLC手术切除的患者,在764例患者中,EGFR突变患者未达到中位DFS,ALK阳性患者中位DFS期为24.3个月,KRAS突变患者中位RFS期72.9个月。经分期调整后,与EGFR突变人群相比,ALK阳性仍与较差的DFS差有关(HR=1.8,95%CI:1.1~3.1)[35]。韩国的一项研究纳入了162例接受根治性手术治疗的早期不吸烟肺腺癌患者中,ALK阳性患者14例(8.6%);阳性患者DFS期更短(28.0个月vs.33.9个月;P=0.128),提示阳性患者更易出现术后疾病的复发[36]。中国的一项研究回顾性分析了在天津肿瘤医院接受过根治性切除术的675例患者,EML4-ALK阳性患者的DFS期明显短于EGFR突变阳性和野生型患者[37]。来自北京胸科医院的一项研究中EML4-ALK变体3是较短DFS期的独立预后因素[38]。也有研究结果提示驱动基因状态不影响根治术患者的DFS。Blackhall等[39]关于欧洲人群的研究显示,在1 281例接受根治性手术切除的肺腺癌患者中,调整临床因素后,ALK阳性患者与阴性患者在DFS上未表现出差异。韩国Paik等[40]回顾了753例NSCLC手术标本,DFS率分别为76.4个月vs.71.3个月(P=0.66),ALK阳性患者与ALK阴性患者的DFS无统计学差异。中国的Liu等[41]分析了147例完全切除的Ⅰ~ⅢA期肺腺癌患者中ALK重排与预后之间的关联。ALK阳性组和ALK阴性组4年DFS率分别为66.2%和61.9%,ALK阳性与更好的DFS无关(DFS,P=0.289;OS,P=0.549)。

3.2 肿瘤突变负荷(tumor mutational burden,TMB)和肿瘤组织细胞程序性死亡-配体1(programmedcelldeath-ligand 1,PD-L1)表达

在晚期NSCLC中,TMB和肿瘤组织PD-L1表达在免疫治疗疗效预测方面具有重要作用。日本一项对90例手术切除的NSCLC的回顾性研究表明,以中位值(TMB=62)作为临界值,TMB高的患者与TMB低的患者DFS无显著差异,但OS显著降低(HR=6.633,P=0.000 3),在Ⅰ期NSCLC患者中,高TMB与较差的OS(HR=7.582,P=0.001 8)和DFS(HR=6.07,P=0.007 2)相关[42]。一项针对肺癌辅助顺铂评估(LACE)-Bio-Ⅱ研究中,作者分析了来自900多例进行辅助治疗的早期NSCLC患者的长期随访数据,高非同义TMB(>8个突变/Mb)NSCLC患者拥有更好临床结局(总生存期、无病生存期及肺癌特异性生存期)[43]

与晚期NSCLC临床试验的数据相比,目前大型可切除NSCLC队列中的PD-L1表达相对较低。PD-L1表达≥50%的比例为9.5%,与其他分期相比,I期NSCLC的PD-L1表达较低(P=0.001 2)。PD-L1表达与EGFR基因表达(P=0.015 6)和KRAS基因表达(P=0.000 4)相关。尽管生存曲线显示PD-L1表达与整个NSCLC队列和腺癌亚组的不良预后显著相关,但在对临床特征进行多变量调整后,发现PD-L1表达与死亡率之间没有显著关联[44]。欧洲的大型回顾性研究评估2 182例NSCLC病例的PD-L1表达,以PD-L1≥1%作为阳性临界值,与MET过表达、PTEN、EGFR和KRAS突变的表达显著相关(仅见于腺癌),在调整临床病理学特征后,PD-L1阳性与腺癌患者根治术后的更好预后相关[45]

4 影像学特征

随着计算机断层扫描(computed tomography,CT)在肺癌筛查中的应用,磨玻璃结节和/或实性结节的检出率逐年升高,其中相当一部分经术后病理确诊为原位腺癌(situ adenocarcinoma,AIS)、微浸润性腺癌(minimally invasive adenocarcinoma,MIA)或早期浸润性腺癌(invasive adenocarcinoma,IA)。对于IA患者来说,术前CT含有磨玻璃成分对预后是有利因素[46,47],无论T分期的大小如何,含有磨玻璃混合成分的5年生存率在90%左右[47],提示这一影像学特征是病理分期以外的重要预后影响因素。对磨玻璃混合结节的IA患者来说,实性面积占比(consolidation tumor ratio,CTR)则是IA患者术后的不良预后因素,CTR 0.50和0.75的放射学临界值能够细分具有不同预后的患者[48,49]

正电子发射机算机断层显像(positron emission tomography computed tomography,PET-CT)被广泛用于NSCLC的术前分期及预后评估,Billè等[50]首先报道了原发肿瘤标准吸收值的最大值(standardized uptake value max,SUVmax)是接受手术的NSCLC患者生存的独立预测因子。日本一项回顾性研究显示SUVmax≥4.7(P<0.01)是Ⅰ期患者术后复发的独立预测因素[51]。2016年,一项荟萃分析纳入5 807例患者,结果显示最大标准化摄取值、代谢肿瘤体积和总病灶糖酵解较高的患者复发或死亡风险较高。近期的一项荟萃分析显示对于Ⅰ~Ⅱ期NSCLC患者总病灶糖酵解更高和代谢肿瘤体积的增加会带来更高的副反应风险,并且总病灶糖酵解与死亡风险增加有关[52]

5 结语

总的来说,Ⅰ~Ⅲ期NSCLC在其临床表现、组织病理学、治疗反应和术后复发风险方面存在很大差异。分期仍然是NSCLC根治术后的重要影响因素,病理高危因素则有助于对同一分期患者进行细分,帮助筛选辅助治疗获益的最佳人群,新的肺腺癌的病理分级可能会作为预后的重要评价指标。驱动基因状态对于预后的影响尚无明确定论,TMB及PD-L1表达受限于研究方法和检测手段,仍无统一结论,分子生物学因素的影响有赖于更大规模的前瞻性研究进行确定。影像学特点与早期肺癌根治术后的预后明确相关,影像因素与病理及分子生物学特征的结合可能是未来NSCLC根治术后预后评估模型的新方向。

参考文献
[1]
SUNGHFERLAYJSIEGELRLet al.Global Cancer Statistics 2020:GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries[J].CA Cancer J Clin202171(3):209-249.
[2]
ETTINGERDSWOODDEAISNERDLet al.NCCN Guidelines Insights:Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer,Version 2.2021[J].J Natl Compr Canc Netw202119(3):254-266.
[3]
GOLDSTRAWPCHANSKYKCROWLEYJet al.The IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project:Proposals for Revision of the TNM Stage Groupings in the Forthcoming(Eighth)Edition of the TNM Classification for Lung Cancer[J].J Thorac Oncol201611(1):39-51.
[4]
SHEWALEJBCORSINIEMCORREAAMet al.Time trends and predictors of survival in surgically resected early-stage non-small cell lung cancer patients[J].J Surg Oncol2020122(3):495-505.
[5]
POWELLHATATALJBALDWINDRet al.Early mortality after surgical resection for lung cancer:an analysis of the English National Lung cancer audit[J].Thorax201368(9):826-834.
[6]
CERFOLIORJBRYANTASSCOTTEet al.Women with pathologic stage Ⅰ,Ⅱ,and Ⅲ non-small cell lung cancer have better survival than men[J].Chest2006130(6):1796-1802.
[7]
SACHSESARTIPYUJACKSONVSex and Survival After Surgery for Lung Cancer:A Swedish Nationwide Cohort[J].Chest2021159(5):2029-2039.
[8]
CHRISTENSENNLLØKKEADALTONSOet al.Smoking,alcohol,and nutritional status in relation to one-year mortality in Danish stage I lung cancer patients[J].Lung Cancer201812440-44.
[9]
SHEIKHMMUKERIYAASHANGINAOet al.Postdiagnosis Smoking Cessation and Reduced Risk for Lung Cancer Progression and Mortality:A Prospective Cohort Study[J].Ann Intern Med2021174(9):1232-1239.
[10]
ALIFANOMDAFFRÉEIANNELLIAet al.The Reality of Lung Cancer Paradox:The Impact of Body Mass Index on Long-Term Survival of Resected Lung Cancer.A French Nationwide Analysis from the Epithor Database[J].Cancers(Basel)202113(18):4574.
[11]
ICARDPSCHUSSLEROLOIMet al.Pre-Disease and Pre-Surgery BMI,Weight Loss and Sarcopenia Impact Survival of Resected Lung Cancer Independently of Tumor Stage[J].Cancers(Basel)202012(2):266.
[12]
WANGSHAOJQIANCet al.Tumor Spread Through Air Spaces Is a Survival Predictor in Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer[J].Clin Lung Cancer201920(5):e584-e591.
[13]
YANAGAWANSHIONOSABIKOMet al.The Clinical Impact of Solid and Micropapillary Patterns in Resected Lung Adenocarcinoma[J].J Thorac Oncol201611(11):1976-1983.
[14]
JIANGLLIANGWSHENJet al.The impact of visceral pleural invasion in node-negative non-small cell lung cancer:a systematic review and meta-analysis[J].Chest2015148(4):903-911.
[15]
PATELAJDANIELGNAIDUBet al.The significance of microvascular invasion after complete resection of early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer[J].Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg201622(1):101-105.
[16]
NERISYOSHIDAJISHIIGet al.Prognostic impact of microscopic vessel invasion and visceral pleural invasion in non-small cell lung cancer:a retrospective analysis of 2657 patients[J].Ann Surg2014260(2):383-388.
[17]
ZHAOYWANGRSHENXet al.Minor Components of Micropapillary and Solid Subtypes in Lung Adenocarcinoma are Predictors of Lymph Node Metastasis and Poor Prognosis[J].Ann Surg Oncol201623(6):2099-2105.
[18]
HUNGJJYEHYCWUYCet al.Prognostic Factors in Completely Resected Node-Negative Lung Adenocarcinoma of 3 cm or Smaller[J].J Thorac Oncol201712(12):1824-1833.
[19]
WANGYZHENGDZHENGJet al.Predictors of recurrence and survival of pathological T1N0M0 invasive adenocarcinoma following lobectomy[J].J Cancer Res Clin Oncol2018144(6):1015-1023.
[20]
QIANFYANGWWANGRet al.Prognostic significance and adjuvant chemotherapy survival benefits of a solid or micropapillary pattern in patients with resected stage IB lung adenocarcinoma[J].J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg2018155(3):1227-1235.
[21]
LUOJHUANGQWANGRet al.Prognostic and predictive value of the novel classification of lung adenocarcinoma in patients with stage IB[J].J Cancer Res Clin Oncol2016142(9):2031-2040.
[22]
CAOSTENGJXUJet al.Value of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with resected stage IB solid predominant and solid non-predominant lung adenocarcinoma[J].Thorac Cancer201910(2):249-255.
[23]
BRANCAGIENIABARRESIVet al.An Updated Review of Cribriform Carcinomas with Emphasis on Histopathological Diagnosis and Prognostic Significance[J].Oncol Rev201711(1):317.
[24]
WARTHAMULEYTKOSSAKOWSKICet al.Prognostic impact and clinicopathological correlations of the cribriform pattern in pulmonary adenocarcinoma[J].J Thorac Oncol201510(4):638-644.
[25]
XUCZHUKCHENDet al.Efficacy and Benefit of Postoperative Chemotherapy in Micropapillray or Solid Predominant Pattern in Stage IB Lung Adenocarcinoma:A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis[J].Front Surg20218795921.
[26]
MOREIRAALOCAMPOPSSXIAYet al.A Grading System for Invasive Pulmonary Adenocarcinoma:A Proposal From the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Pathology Committee[J].J Thorac Oncol202015(10):1599-1610.
[27]
OKAMOTOTKITAHARAHSHIMAMATSUSet al.Prognostic Impact of EGFR Driver Mutations on Postoperative Disease Recurrence in Lung Adenocarcinoma[J].Anticancer Res201636(6):3057-3063.
[28]
NISHIITYOKOSETMIYAGIYet al.Prognostic value of EGFR mutations in surgically resected pathological stage I lung adenocarcinoma[J].Asia Pac J Clin Oncol201713(5):e204-e211.
[29]
YANGXNYANHHWANGJet al.Real-World Survival Outcomes Based on EGFR Mutation Status in Chinese Patients With Lung Adenocarcinoma After Complete Resection:Results From the ICAN Study[J].JTO Clin Res Rep20223(1):100257.
[30]
ZHANGSMZHUQGDINGXXet al.Prognostic value of EGFR and KRAS in resected non-small cell lung cancer:a systematic review and meta-analysis[J].Cancer Manag Res2018103393-3404.
[31]
IZARBSEQUISTLLEEMet al.The impact of EGFR mutation status on outcomes in patients with resected stage I non-small cell lung cancers[J].Ann Thorac Surg201396(3):962-968.
[32]
MASAGOKSETOKFUJITASet al.Long-Term Recurrence of Completely Resected NSCLC[J].JTO Clin Res Rep20201(3):100076.
[33]
SAWSPLZHOUSCHENJet al.Association of Clinicopathologic and Molecular Tumor Features With Recurrence in Resected Early-Stage Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer[J].JAMA Netw Open20214(11):e2131892.
[34]
KONDOYICHINOSEJNINOMIYAHet al.Combination of epidermal growth factor receptor mutation and the presence of high-grade patterns is associated with recurrence in resected stage I lung adenocarcinoma[J].Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg2022.
[35]
CHAFTJEDAGOGO-JACKISANTINIFCet al.Clinical outcomes of patients with resected,early-stage ALK-positive lung cancer[J].Lung Cancer201812267-71.
[36]
KIMMHSHIMHSKANGDRet al.Clinical and prognostic implications of ALK and ROS1 rearrangements in never-smokers with surgically resected lung adenocarcinoma[J].Lung Cancer201483(3):389-395.
[37]
LIPGAOQJIANGXet al.Comparison of Clinicopathological Features and Prognosis between ALK Rearrangements and EGFR Mutations in Surgically Resected Early-stage Lung Adenocarcinoma[J].J Cancer201910(1):61-71.
[38]
TAOHSHILZHOUAet al.Distribution of EML4-ALK fusion variants and clinical outcomes in patients with resected non-small cell lung cancer[J].Lung Cancer2020149154-161.
[39]
BLACKHALLFHPETERSSBUBENDORFLet al.Prevalence and clinical outcomes for patients with ALK-positive resected stage Ⅰ to Ⅲ adenocarcinoma:results from the European Thoracic Oncology Platform Lungscape Project[J].J Clin Oncol201432(25):2780-2787.
[40]
PAIKJHCHOICMKIMHet al.Clinicopathologic implication of ALK rearrangement in surgically resected lung cancer:a proposal of diagnostic algorithm for ALK-rearranged adenocarcinoma[J].Lung Cancer201276(3):403-409.
[41]
LIUYYEXYUYet al.Prognostic significance of anaplastic lymphoma kinase rearrangement in patients with completely resected lung adenocarcinoma[J].J Thorac Dis201911(10):4258-4270.
[42]
OWADA-OZAKIYMUTOSTAKAGIHet al.Prognostic Impact of Tumor Mutation Burden in Patients With Completely Resected Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer:Brief Report[J].J Thorac Oncol201813(8):1217-1221.
[43]
DEVARAKONDASROTOLOFTSAOM Set al.Tumor Mutation Burden as a Biomarker in Resected Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer[J].J Clin Oncol201836(30):2995-3006.
[44]
YUHBRUSTUGUNO TEKMANSet al.Programmed Cell Death Ligand 1 Expression in Resected Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer[J].Clin Lung Cancer202122(4):e555-e562.
[45]
KERRKMTHUNNISSENEDAFNIUet al.A retrospective cohort study of PD-L1 prevalence,molecular associations and clinical outcomes in patients with NSCLC:Results from the European Thoracic Oncology Platform(ETOP)Lungscape Project[J].Lung Cancer201913195-103.
[46]
LIUJDONGMSUNXet al.Prognostic Value of 18F-FDG PET/CT in Surgical Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer:A Meta-Analysis[J].PLoS One201611(1):e0146195.
[47]
HATTORIAHIRAYAMASMATSUNAGATet al.Distinct Clinicopathologic Characteristics and Prognosis Based on the Presence of Ground Glass Opacity Component in Clinical Stage IA Lung Adenocarcinoma[J].J Thorac Oncol201914(2):265-275.
[48]
XIJYINJLIANGJet al.Prognostic Impact of Radiological Consolidation Tumor Ratio in Clinical Stage IA Pulmonary Ground Glass Opacities[J].Front Oncol202111616149.
[49]
HANDAYTSUTANIYOKADAMTransition of Treatment for Ground Glass Opacity-Dominant Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer[J].Front Oncol202111655651.
[50]
BILLÈAOKIRORLSKANJETIAet al.The prognostic significance of maximum standardized uptake value of primary tumor in surgically treated non-small-cell lung cancer patients:analysis of 413 cases[J].Clin Lung Cancer201314(2):149-156.
[51]
SHIONOSABIKOMSATOTPositron emission tomography/computed tomography and lymphovascular invasion predict recurrence in stage I lung cancers[J].J Thorac Oncol20116(1):43-47.
[52]
WENWPIAOYXUDet al.Prognostic Value of MTV and TLG of(18)F-FDG PET in Patients with Stage Ⅰ and Ⅱ Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer:a Meta-Analysis[J].Contrast Media Mol Imaging202120217528971.
 
 
展开/关闭提纲
查看图表详情
回到顶部
放大字体
缩小字体
标签
关键词