Chest ACCP Career Connection
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Article Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (38)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Leong, S. S.
Right arrow Articles by Green, M. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Leong, S. S.
Right arrow Articles by Green, M. R.
(Chest. 1999;115:242-248.)
© 1999 American College of Chest Physicians

The 1997 International Staging System for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer*

Have All the Issues Been Addressed?

Swan S. Leong, MD; Caio M. Rocha Lima, MD; Carol A. Sherman, MD and Mark R. Green, MD

* From the Hollings Cancer Center and Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC.


   Abstract
TOP
 Abstract
Introduction
 History
 New International Staging for...
 Are There Remaining Areas...
 Conclusions
 References
 
The International Staging System for Lung Cancer has been revised recently. Important changes have been made to allow better correlation of prognoses and direction of management. The classification of synchronous pulmonary nodules in the same lobe as the primary tumor as T4 stage IIIB may imply a poorer outcome than is warranted, while the designation of a similar stage for malignant pleural effusion may not be reflective of the very poor prognosis associated with this extent of disease.

Key Words: lung cancer • non-small cell • staging


   Introduction
TOP
 Abstract
 Introduction
History
 New International Staging for...
 Are There Remaining Areas...
 Conclusions
 References
 
Staging of lung cancer provides a common language for communication among health-care providers and investigators. Its main purpose is to allow

classification of disease according to its extent and severity and to group together patients with similar prognoses. It facilitates meaningful clinical and translational research and allows comparison of research results. Study findings and observations of the clinical course of disease, correlated with an accepted staging system, define prognostic subgroups and provide the rationale for treatment recommendations (Table 1 ).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 1. Goals of a Cancer Staging System

 
Over the last two decades, the staging system for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has undergone significant changes in an attempt to minimize variability of prognosis within each group and correlate different treatment strategies for different stage groups. Efforts have also been made to make some "anatomical sense" when devising local treatment. With the most recent revision of the tumor, lymph node, metastasis (TNM) staging system, published in CHEST in 1997,1 some of the deficiencies of previous guidelines have been addressed. However, some issues remain and new concerns have arisen. Staging of certain subgroups of patients may still not be entirely satisfactory.


   History
TOP
 Abstract
 Introduction
 History
New International Staging for...
 Are There Remaining Areas...
 Conclusions
 References
 
In 1974, the Task Force on Carcinoma of the Lung from the American Joint Committee for Cancer Staging (AJCC), using the general rules of the TNM system,2 recommended criteria for clinical staging of NSCLC based on an analysis of 2,155 patients with bronchogenic carcinoma.3 Disease extent was described according to the primary tumor (T), nodal status (N), and presence or absence of metastasis (M). Stage groupings were generated through analysis of > 300 survival curves drawn from various combinations of T, N, and M descriptors. In this initial staging system, tumor was described as T0 to T3, with pleural effusion and direct tumor involvement of mediastinal structures included in the T3 category. Nodal status ranged from N0 to N2. All mediastinal lymph nodes were included in the N2 category. Supraclavicular and contralateral hilar lymph nodes were considered distant metastases. Three stage groupings were defined. Patients with stage I (T1-2N0M0, T1N1M0) disease demonstrated a relatively favorable outcome. Those with stage II (T2N1M0) disease did less well. Stage III (T3 or N2 or M1) disease was very unfavorable.

This system did provide a simple schema that reflected general prognostic difference (most patients still did poorly) and grossly divided patients into surgical (stage I and II) and nonsurgical groups. The stage III category, however, was a very heterogeneous subgroup, ranging from minor amounts of chest wall invasion by the primary tumor to multiorgan metastatic disease. It encompassed patients with very different prognoses.1 ,3 ,4 The T3 category itself included subgroups now recognized to have potentially important outcome differences, such as those with peripheral chest wall invasion or an origin close to the carina without associated nodal involvement vs those with malignant pleural effusion or mediastinal structure invasion.5 ,6 At the time, however, available treatment options were so limited that the eventual outcome for nearly all patients with stage III cancer was disease progression and death. Only the time frame differed.

In 1985, members of AJCC, Union Internationale Contre Cancer, and Japanese and German representatives proposed a revised International Staging System for lung cancer7 based on an analysis of 3,753 lung cancer patient records from the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center and the North American Lung Cancer Study Group's Reference Center for Anatomic and Pathologic Classification of Lung Cancer. An additional tumor descriptor, T4, was added. This included tumors with invasion of mediastinal structures or one or more vertebral bodies, or an associated malignant effusion. The node category N2 was limited to involvement of ipsilateral mediastinal and subcarinal nodes. A new N3 category included contralateral mediastinal, contralateral hilar and supraclavicular lymph node involvement. Even though the prognosis of patients with supraclavicular lymph node involvement was recognized to be poor, supraclavicular node involvement was included in this N3 group since these nodes were readily included within a single radiation port and hence considered regional spread. The original three stage groupings were expanded to four groups, stages I through IV, with stage I and II disease amenable to primary surgical management. The overly broad stage III category of the 1974 staging system was split into locally advanced disease (III) and disseminated disease (IV). Patients with locally advanced disease were further divided into those who were candidates for complete resection (IIIA) and those who were not (IIIB). But the prognostic interplay of T and N descriptors and the categorization of patients to reflect and direct treatment decisions were only partially addressed. As the 1986 International Staging System was widely implemented, these limitations became more evident, setting the stage for the most recent revision of TNM lung cancer staging.


   New International Staging for Lung Cancer
TOP
 Abstract
 Introduction
 History
 New International Staging for...
Are There Remaining Areas...
 Conclusions
 References
 
The most recent revision of the TNM staging system for lung cancer published in June 19971 used a database of 5,319 patients with primary lung cancer treated at the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center from 1975 to 1988 or by the North American Lung Cancer Study Group from 1977 to 1982. The following are new features of the revised staging system: (1) the division of stage I into IA and IB; (2) the division of stage II into IIA and IIB and the assignment of T3N0M0 to stage IIB; (3) designation of tumor with satellite nodules in the same lobe as T4; and (4) the assignment of a primary tumor with one or more synchronous lesions within different lobes of the same lung as M1 (Tables 2 –5 ).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 2. Primary Tumor (T)

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 5. Stage Grouping (TNM Combinations)

 
Patients with T1N0M0 tumors have a favorable outcome after complete resection of disease. Their survival is substantially better than that of other patients with stage I disease whose tumors are > 3 cm or invade visceral pleura (T2)4 ,8 ,9 ,10 ,11 ,12 (Table 6 ). The Mayo Clinic group8 evaluated survival data from 495 patients with pathologic stage I NSCLC. They documented a 5-year survival of 80% in patients with T1N0M0 disease vs about 62% for those with T2N0M0 disease. At Duke, Harpole et al9 reported a similar significant difference of 70% and 50% 5-year survival for T1N0M0 disease and T2N0M0 disease, respectively. The Japanese group led by Watanabe et al12 demonstrated a statistical difference in 5-year survival between T1N0M0 and T2N0M0 disease (77.6% vs 60.1%). They also showed a further significant drop in survival rate for patients with tumor size > 5 cm when compared to those with tumors measuring 3 to 5 cm (46% vs 61%), emphasizing a continuous impact of increasing tumor size on survival.12


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 6. Prognostic Implications of Tumor Size for Patients With Pathologic Stage I Disease

 
The database for the 1997 staging proposal, as well as the individual series already discussed, clearly demonstrated a significant survival advantage of T1N0M0 compared with T2N0M0 disease, according to both clinical and pathologic staging.1 Putting patients with T1N0M0 disease into a totally separate stage I, analogous to breast cancer, had been considered but not implemented during the development of the 1986 staging system.7 This same option was again rejected in the current revision, but a compromise was reached by making it a separate stage I subgroup. Stage I disease is now divided into IA (T1N0M0) and IB (T2N0M0), highlighting the prognostic differences between the two groups and facilitating different therapeutic approaches to their management. Conflicting but provocative data on adjuvant chemotherapy have been observed in patients with T2N0M0 disease,13 ,14 and currently several postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy trials enroll patients with T2N0 (stage IB) disease while excluding those with T1N0 disease (eg, CALGB 9633, NCIC BR-10). The patients with T1N0 disease are considered candidates for chemoprevention trials since they are recognized as being at substantially increased risk of manifesting a second primary lung cancer15 ,16 (recently closed intergroup trial INT-0125) following cure of their initial lung cancer.

In the 1986 International Staging System, all patients with either T3 or N2 disease were designated to have stage IIIA disease. However, several investigators have demonstrated significant differences in survival rates following complete surgical resection between patients with T3N0-1 and T1-3N2 disease.4 ,17 ,18 Patients with T3N0M0 disease, usually with peripheral parenchymal lesions invading the chest wall or when involving the superior sulcus, do better than those with N2 involvement.19 ,20 ,21 Their survival approximates that of T2N1M0 disease. For example, in a retrospective study of patients with T3 disease based on chest wall invasion, McCaughan et al20 noted a 5-year survival rate of 56% for those with completely resected T3N0M0 tumor. Aggregate T3N0 data suggest that these patients are candidates for primary surgical management. However, several series demonstrate that essentially all patients with radiographic or mediastinoscopic evidence of N2 involvement, regardless of T category, do poorly with primary surgical resection.22 ,23 Under the new staging system, T3N0M0 patients have been moved to stage IIB, together with T2N1M0 patients, to reflect their similar survival outcome and their appropriateness as candidates for primary surgical therapy. Interestingly, this redistribution again brings the lung cancer staging system closer to that used for breast cancer staging.

The original 1986 version of the International Staging System for Lung Cancer did not provide clear guidelines for categorization of synchronous pulmonary nodules occurring in the same lung as the primary tumor. Some investigators considered the presence of any intrapulmonary lesions other than the primary tumor indicative of M1 disease,12 while others considered the presence of any contralateral lung nodules as M1 but ipsilateral nodules as locally advanced disease. The staging conventions were clarified by the footnotes in the fourth edition of the AJCC staging manual published in 1993: satellite lesions in the same lobe led to upstaging of the primary by one T category while the presence of a synchronous ipsilateral lung lesion in a separate lobe was considered T4. In the 1997 staging system, these conventions were modified significantly. Any synchronous satellite pulmonary nodule situated in the same lobe as the primary is now considered T4 (stage IIIB) disease while all other ipsilateral synchronous pulmonary nodules are staged as M1 disease.

In 1989, Deslauriers et al24 evaluated the impact of what they called satellite pulmonary nodules (synchronous ipsilateral intrapulmonary lesions of the same histology but smaller in size than the primary lesion) in 1,105 patients seen between 1969 and 1986 who underwent pulmonary resection as primary treatment for bronchogenic carcinoma. Eighty-four patients had synchronous ipsilateral pulmonary nodules, mostly satellite lesions in the same lobe as the primary tumor (68 of 84). Only a small minority were actually identified on the preoperative chest radiograph. The other 1,021 patients had no synchronous intraparenchymal lesions. Disease was staged according to the 1974 guidelines, independent of the presence or absence of satellite nodules. Among the large group of patients without synchronous nodules, the 5-year survival rates were 54.4%, 40.4%, and 20.3%, respectively, for those with stages I, II, and III disease. Among patients with the additional lesions, the 5-year survival rates for stages I, II, and III were 32%, 12.5%, and 5.6%, respectively. Patients with synchronous lesions more often were treated with pneumonectomy and in all three stages had poorer prognoses than when these lesions were not present. However, the findings demonstrated that some patients with synchronous ipsilateral nodules could experience long-term survival with resection and suggested that at least synchronous nodules in the same lobe should be approached with primary resection.

Watanabe et al12 evaluated the survival of 49 patients with resected lung cancer with synchronous ipsilateral intrapulmonary satellite nodules. In most of these patients, the satellite lesions were first identified in the resected surgical specimen. The T and N status of these patients was not specified. However, when the survival of these 49 patients was compared with that of a total of 306 patients with resected stage IIIA (225) and IIIB (81) tumors without intrapulmonary nodules, the 3- and 5-year survivals of patients with satellite nodules were no different from those with IIIA disease without satellites, and superior to those with stage IIIB disease. This again suggests that the presence of a small satellite nodule in the same lobe as the dominant primary lesion should not be considered a contraindication to primary surgical management.

Satellite lesions in the same lobe as the primary lesion may arise from a different mechanism of disease spread than do synchronous ipsilateral lesions in a different lobe. Among the 84 patients of Deslaurier et al24 with satellite nodules, 68 (81%) had them in the same lobe, and in 56 of this subgroup, the nodules were located immediately around the primary or peripherally in the same pulmonary arterial distribution as the main tumor. This led to the speculation that most of these nodules were the result of pulmonary artery invasion and tumor embolization. Lesions located more centrally in the same lobe were much more infrequent (14%) and were thought to represent in-transit lymphatic spread or pulmonary vein emboli.

Shimizu et al25 analyzed 42 patients with intrapulmonary satellite nodules that were not detected preoperatively who underwent complete pulmonary resection. Patients with lesions in the same lobe as the primary tumor had a significantly better 2-year survival (41.5%) than those with lesions in a separate lobe (20%). While still more favorable than for patients with extrathoracic M1 disease, these survival data were consistent with the theory that nodules in a different lobe are most consistent with true metastatic deposits. In addition, the observations by Shimizu et al25 reinforced the concept that patients with a synchronous satellite lesion in the same lobe as the primary may behave more favorably than patients with other subgroups of T4 stage IIIB disease. Despite the fact that the current staging system categorizes satellite nodules within the same lobe as the ipsilateral primary tumor as T4, individuals with this distribution of disease should be strongly considered for definitive resection if there are no other contraindications to surgery.

Synchronous lung primaries, as defined by Martini and Melamed26 as (1) tumors with different histologies or (2) if histology was the same, the second tumor should be in a different segment, lobe, or lung, with origin from different carcinoma-in-situ, with no involvement of lymphatics common to both, and with no extrapulmonary metastasis, are uncommon, accounting for <= 1% of lung cancer presentations.27 ,28 ,29 While the outcome for such patients is better than for patients with a single primary lung cancer and a synchronous metastasis in a separate lobe or in the contralateral lung (stage IV disease), it is poorer than that expected from a single tumor of a similar stage. For example, patients presenting with two synchronous stage I tumors have reported survivals of 25 to 41% despite complete resection of both lesions. The lowered rate of long-term survival can be described as the chance of long-term survival from tumor 1 multiplied by the chance of long-term survival from tumor 2.

Optimum therapy for patients with truly synchronous primaries is definitive resection of each lesion. Problems associated with this approach are the frequency of underlying lung disease limiting tolerance of multiple lung resections as well as the difficulty in determining whether the lesions are truly separate primaries and not metastatic disease. In the future, new molecular studies may help to determine with greater certainty whether two synchronous lesions of the same histology are, in fact, separate primary tumors.


   Are There Remaining Areas of Controversy?
TOP
 Abstract
 Introduction
 History
 New International Staging for...
 Are There Remaining Areas...
Conclusions
 References
 
Currently, definitive management of stage III disease usually involves multimodality therapy. The goal of treatment is cure and components of therapy address both the local tumor and systemic micrometastases.30 ,31 ,32 ,33 ,34 In theory, the presence of a malignant pleural effusion precludes curative treatment of documented intrathoracic disease with a local or regional modality (surgery and/or radiation) alone. In the database used to develop the 1974 lung cancer staging system, patients with pleural effusion were found to have a particularly poor prognosis.3 However, in the 1986 staging revision, pleural effusion was designated T4 disease, suggesting a more favorable outcome for these patients than for those with frank M1 disease. Recently, Sugiura et al6 compared the survival of 197 patients with stage IIIB disease without pleural effusion, stage IIIB with pleural effusion, and stage IV disease. They found that the median survivals of the three groups were 15.3, 7.5, and 5.5 months, respectively. Survival curves for the stage IIIB patients with effusion were significantly worse than those for stage IIIB patients without effusion, but not significantly different from stage IV patients. They also found that among patients with pleural effusion, there was no significant difference in survival when pleural fluid cytology was positive or negative provided the effusion was exudative and/or bloody, and clinically judged to be resultant from the underlying malignancy, confirming a previous observation of Mountain.35 Based on these observations and our current approaches to patients with stage III disease, it would seem more appropriate to classify patients with pleural effusion as having stage IV rather than T4 stage IIIB disease, since both prognosis and management for these patients are similar to that for stage IV disease.

What about discontinuous pleural nodules in the absence of pleural effusion? Is there a difference in outcome between patients with lesions theoretically confined to the visceral pleura covering the primary tumor lobe, and those with more extensive, multifocal studding on the visceral or parietal pleura? In footnotes to the 1986 staging classification, all of these presentations were called T4 disease. Does the "more extensive" or "more distant" pleural involvement have more dire implications? Should such patients, like those with a malignant pleural effusion, be considered to have M1 disease? There is little in the literature addressing the outcome of this group of patients. Shimizu et al36 treated 38 patients with primary lung cancer and varying degrees of pleural involvement. All patients had parietal pleurectomy plus various extents of lung resection followed by sclerosing therapy.36 The overall 5-year survival rate of 19.4% for this highly selected group was better than would have been expected for patients with malignant pleural effusion. Patients with primary lung tumors < 4 cm in diameter and with negative nodes did much better than the rest. While the actual extent of pleural involvement was not discussed, the few long-term survivors were probably most like patients with T3N0 or even T2N0 disease. Additional survival and patterns-of-failure data on patients presenting with visceral pleural involvement not due to direct local extension of the primary tumor; and those presenting with one or more nodules on the parietal pleura, are needed.


   Conclusions
TOP
 Abstract
 Introduction
 History
 New International Staging for...
 Are There Remaining Areas...
 Conclusions
References
 
Our evidence-based, TNM staging system for lung cancer has gone through two major revisions since its development in 1974. The most recent revision acknowledges size alone to be of independent prognostic significance and divides stages I and II disease into A and B subcategories based on the size of the primary tumor. T3N0 disease, recognized as prognostically more favorable and more amenable to primary surgical therapy than other subgroups of stage IIIA disease, has been reclassified as stage IIB. These changes seem sound and are already reflective of current treatment practice. The modified classification of synchronous ipsilateral pulmonary nodules in the 1997 revision as T4 stage IIIB may imply a poorer outcome for patients with intralobar satellites than is warranted. Management of these patients with nonoperative therapy appropriate to stage IIIB (T4) disease may ignore a curative surgical option for some of them. Careful individualization of therapy in these cases is required. Patients with malignant pleural effusions do poorly, with survival experiences very similar to groups with stage IV disease. Whether future therapeutic advances will create important distinctions between patients with malignant effusions and those with frank M1 disease remains to be seen. Current data seem to suggest that the 1997 staging revision may have missed an appropriate opportunity to reclassify malignant effusion disease into the stage IV category. These and other issues will be points for consideration when the third revision of the International Staging System for lung cancer is considered in the next millennium.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 3. Regional Lymph Nodes (N)

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 4. Distant Metastasis (M)

 

   Acknowledgements
 
ACKNOWLEDGMENT: Andrew T. Turrisi, MD, and Carolyn E. Reed, MD, provided a critical review of this article.


   Footnotes
 
For related material see page 233.

Correspondence to: Mark R. Green, MD, Hollings Cancer Center, Medical University of South Carolina, 171 Ashley Ave, Charleston, SC 29425-2225; e-mail: greenmrk@musc.edu

Abbreviations: AJCC = American Joint Committee for Cancer Staging; NSCLC = non-small cell lung cancer; TNM = primary tumor, lymph nodes, metastasis

Received for publication April 8, 1998. Accepted for publication September 1, 1998.


   References
TOP
 Abstract
 Introduction
 History
 New International Staging for...
 Are There Remaining Areas...
 Conclusions
 References
 

  1. Mountain, CF (1997) Revisions in the International System for Staging Lung Cancer. Chest 111,1710-1717[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Denoix, PF (1946) Enquete permanent dans les centres anticancereux. Bull Inst Nat Hyg 1,70-75
  3. Mountain, CF, Carr, DT, Anderson, WAD (1974) A system for the clinical staging of lung cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 120,130-138[ISI]
  4. Naruke, T, Goya, T, Tsuchiya, R, et al (1988) Prognosis and survival in resected lung carcinoma based on the new international staging system. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 96,440-447[Abstract]
  5. Martini, N, Yellin, A, Ginsberg, RJ, et al (1994) Management of non-small cell lung cancer with direct mediastinal involvement. Ann Thorac Surg 58,1447-1451[Abstract]
  6. Sugiura, S, Ando, Y, Minami, H, et al (1997) Prognostic value of pleural effusion in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Clin Cancer Res 3,47-50[Abstract]
  7. Mountain, CF (1986) A new international staging system for lung cancer. Chest 89,225-231s
  8. Williams, DE, Pairolero, PC, Davis, CS, et al (1981) Survival of patients surgically treated for stage I lung cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 82,70-76[Abstract]
  9. Harpole, DH, Herndon, JE, Wolfe, WG, et al (1995) A prognostic model of recurrence and death in stage I non-small cell lung cancer utilizing presentation, histopathology, and oncoprotein expression. Cancer Res 55,51-56[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Pairolero, PC, Williams, DE, Bergstralh, EJ, et al (1984) Postsurgical stage I bronchogenic carcinoma: morbid implications of recurrent disease. Ann Thorac Surg 38,331-336[Abstract]
  11. Mountain, CF, Lukeman, JM, Hammar, SP, et al (1987) LCSG: lung cancer classification: the relationship of disease extent and cell type to survival in a clinical trials population. J Surg Oncol 35,147-156[ISI][Medline]
  12. Watanabe, Y, Shimizu, J, Oda, M, et al (1991) Proposals regarding some deficiencies in the new international staging system for non-small cell lung cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 21,160-168[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Feld, R, Rubinstein, L, Thomas, PA, et al (1993) Adjuvant chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and cisplatin in patients with completely resected stage I non-small-cell lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 85,299-306[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Niiranen, A, Niitamo-Korhonen, S, Kouri, M, et al (1992) Adjuvant chemotherapy after radical surgery for non-small-cell lung cancer: a randomized study. J Clin Oncol 10,1927-1932[Abstract]
  15. Lippman, SM, Hong, WK (1993) Not yet standard: retinoids versus second primary tumors. J Clin Oncol 11,1204-1207[Free Full Text]
  16. Pastorino, U, Infante, M, Maioli, M, et al (1993) Adjuvant treatment of stage I lung cancer with high-dose vitamin A. J Clin Oncol 11,1216-1222[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Mountain, CF (1990) Expanded possibilities for surgical treatment of lung cancer: survival in stage IIIa disease. Chest 97,1045-1051[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Watanabe, Y, Shimizu, J, Oda, M, et al (1991) Results of surgical treatment in patients with stage IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 39,44-49[ISI][Medline]
  19. Green, MR, Lilenbaum, RC (1994) Stage IIIA category of non-small-cell lung cancer: a new proposal. J Natl Cancer Inst 86,586-588[Free Full Text]
  20. McCaughan, BC, Martini, N, Bains, MS, et al (1985) Chest wall invasion in carcinoma of the lung: therapeutic and prognostic implications. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 89,836-841[Abstract]
  21. Paulson, DL (1975) Carcinomas in the superior pulmonary sulcus. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 70,1095-1104[Abstract]
  22. Martini, N, Flehinger, BJ (1987) The role of surgery in N2 lung cancer. Surg Clin North Am 67,1037-1049[ISI][Medline]
  23. Pearson, FG, DeLarue, NC, IIves, R, et al (1982) Significance of positive superior mediastinal nodes identified at mediastinoscopy in patients with resectable cancer of the lung. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 83,1-11[ISI][Medline]
  24. Deslauriers, J, Brisson, J, Cartier, R, et al (1989) Carcinoma of the lung: evaluation of satellite nodules as a factor influencing prognosis after resection. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 97,504-512[Abstract]
  25. Shimizu, N, Ando, A, Date, H, et al (1993) Prognosis of undetected intrapulmonary metastases in resected lung cancer. Cancer 71,3868-3872[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  26. Martini, N, Melamed, MR (1975) Multiple primary lung cancers. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 60,606-612
  27. Deschamps, C, Pairolero, PC, Trastek, VF, et al (1990) Multiple primary lung cancers: results of surgical treatment. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 99,769-778[Abstract]
  28. Pommier, RF, Vetto, JT, Lee, JT, et al (1996) Synchronous non-small cell lung cancers. Am J Surg 171,521-524[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
  29. Adebonojo, SA, Moritz, DM, Danby, CA (1997) The results of modern surgical therapy for multiple primary lung cancers. Chest 112,693-701[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Martini, N, Kris, MG, Flehinger, BJ, et al (1993) Preoperative chemotherapy for stage IIIa (N2) lung cancer: the Sloan-Kettering experience with 136 patients. Ann Thorac Surg 55,1365-1374[Abstract]
  31. Roth, JA, Fossella, F, Komaki, R, et al (1994) A randomized trial comparing perioperative chemotherapy and surgery with surgery alone in resectable stage IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 86,673-680[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  32. Rosell, R, Gomez-Codina, J, Camps, C, et al (1994) A randomized trial comparing preoperative chemotherapy plus surgery with surgery alone in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 330,153-158[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. Dillman, RO, Herncon, J, Seagren, SL, et al (1996) Improved survival in stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: seven-year follow-up of cancer and leukemia group B (CALGB) 8433 trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 88,1210-1215[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  34. Jeremic, B, Shibamoto, Y, Acimovic, L, et al (1995) Randomized trial of hyperfractionated radiation therapy with or without concurrent chemotherapy for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 13,452-458[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  35. Mountain, CF (1988) Prognostic implications of the international staging system for lung cancer. Semin Oncol 15,236-245[ISI][Medline]
  36. Shimizu, J, Oda, M, Moita, K, et al (1996) Comparison of pleuropneumonectomy and limited surgery for lung cancer with pleural dissemination. J Surg Oncol 61,1-6[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 RadiologyHome page
R. F. Munden, S. S. Swisher, C. W. Stevens, and D. J. Stewart
Imaging of the Patient with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Radiology, December 1, 2005; 237(3): 803 - 818.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg.Home page
T. Nakagawa, N. Okumura, K. Miyoshi, T. Matsuoka, and K. Kameyama
Prognostic factors in patients with ipsilateral pulmonary metastasis from non-small cell lung cancer
Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., October 1, 2005; 28(4): 635 - 639.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur Respir JHome page
T. Berghmans, A. P. Meert, B. Martin, V. Ninane, and J. P. Sculier
Prognostic role of epidermal growth factor receptor in stage III nonsmall cell lung cancer
Eur. Respir. J., February 1, 2005; 25(2): 329 - 335.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Ann. Thorac. Surg.Home page
Y. Matsuzaki, M. Edagawa, T. Shimizu, M. Hara, M. Tomita, T. Ayabe, and T. Onitsuka
Intrapleural Hyperthermic Perfusion With Chemotherapy Increases Apoptosis in Malignant Pleuritis
Ann. Thorac. Surg., November 1, 2004; 78(5): 1769 - 1772.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JCOHome page
J. S. Friedberg, R. Mick, J. P. Stevenson, T. Zhu, T. M. Busch, D. Shin, D. Smith, M. Culligan, A. Dimofte, E. Glatstein, et al.
Phase II Trial of Pleural Photodynamic Therapy and Surgery for Patients With Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer With Pleural Spread
J. Clin. Oncol., June 1, 2004; 22(11): 2192 - 2201.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ChestHome page
M. Paci, G. Sgarbi, G. Ferrari, S. De Franco, and V. Annessi
Controversies Over UICC-TNM Classification of Non-small Cell Lung Cancer : Model for a Diagnostic Path
Chest, August 1, 2002; 122(2): 754 - 754.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg.Home page
E. Ruffini, O. Rena, M. Bongiovanni, R. Cristofori, M. Mancuso, P. L. Filosso, M. Molinatti, and G. Maggi
The significance of intraoperative pleural effusion during surgery for bronchogenic carcinoma
Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., March 1, 2002; 21(3): 508 - 513.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ChestHome page
A. Yamanaka, T. Hirai, A. Takahashi, and F. Konishi
Analysis of Lobar Lymph Node Metastases Around the Bronchi of Primary and Nonprimary Lobes in Lung Cancer : Risk of Remnant Tumor at the Root of the Nonprimary Lobes
Chest, January 1, 2002; 121(1): 112 - 117.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ChestHome page
F. E. Mott, N. Sharma, and P. Ashley
Malignant Pleural Effusion in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer--Time for a Stage Revision?
Chest, January 1, 2001; 119(1): 317 - 318.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Ann. Thorac. Surg.Home page
A. Yamanaka, T. Hirai, T. Fujimoto, Y. Ohtake, and F. Konishi
Analyses of segmental lymph node metastases and intrapulmonary metastases of small lung cancer
Ann. Thorac. Surg., November 1, 2000; 70(5): 1624 - 1628.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg.Home page
J. Jassem, J. Skokowski, R. Dziadziuszko, E. Jassem, A. Szymanowska, W. Rzyman, and A. Roszkiewicz
RESULTS OF SURGICAL TREATMENT OF NON-SMALL CELL LUNG CANCER: VALIDATION OF THE NEW POSTOPERATIVE PATHOLOGIC TNM CLASSIFICATION
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., June 1, 2000; 119(6): 1141 - 1146.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ChestHome page
G. Buccheri and D. Ferrigno
Prognostic Value of Stage Grouping and TNM Descriptors in Lung Cancer
Chest, May 1, 2000; 117(5): 1247 - 1255.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Article Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (38)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Leong, S. S.
Right arrow Articles by Green, M. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Leong, S. S.
Right arrow Articles by Green, M. R.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS