Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Sublobar Resection Are the Answers Different or Is It the Questions?

Sublobar Resection Are the Answers Different or Is It the Questions? EDITORIAL Sublobar Resection Are the Answers Different or Is It the Questions? Frank C. Detterbeck, MD he review by Blasberg et al. re-examines the data regarding the role of sublobar Tresection for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a question that was “settled” 15 2,3 years ago by the Lung Cancer Study Group. Indeed, they are not alone, as a randomized study re-examining this question is underway by the Cancer and Leukemia Group B oncology group (140503). The level of interest suggests that many people suspect that the answer regarding the role of sublobar resection has changed. A closer look at the review by Blasberg et al., however, suggests that the real issue is that with increased understanding, the questions have changed. The questions the authors address are not simply whether sublobar resection is as good as lobectomy for early-stage NSCLC. Rather, it is much more nuanced. First, they explore prognostic factors in stage I NSCLC, especially size. Then, they review data regarding the technique of sublobar resection (i.e., wedge resection versus segmentectomy). Specific subgroups of NSCLC, namely bronchioloalveolar carcinoma, may be more amenable to sublobar resection. Sophisticated methods of examining the margins may alter outcomes as well as potentially http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Thoracic Oncology Wolters Kluwer Health

Sublobar Resection Are the Answers Different or Is It the Questions?

Detterbeck, Frank C.
Journal of Thoracic Oncology , Volume 5 (10) – Oct 1, 2010
Download PDF
2 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wolters-kluwer-health/sublobar-resection-are-the-answers-different-or-is-it-the-questions-k0oNgB1BdD

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

ISSN
1556-0864
DOI
10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181f26111
pmid
20871259
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

EDITORIAL Sublobar Resection Are the Answers Different or Is It the Questions? Frank C. Detterbeck, MD he review by Blasberg et al. re-examines the data regarding the role of sublobar Tresection for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), a question that was “settled” 15 2,3 years ago by the Lung Cancer Study Group. Indeed, they are not alone, as a randomized study re-examining this question is underway by the Cancer and Leukemia Group B oncology group (140503). The level of interest suggests that many people suspect that the answer regarding the role of sublobar resection has changed. A closer look at the review by Blasberg et al., however, suggests that the real issue is that with increased understanding, the questions have changed. The questions the authors address are not simply whether sublobar resection is as good as lobectomy for early-stage NSCLC. Rather, it is much more nuanced. First, they explore prognostic factors in stage I NSCLC, especially size. Then, they review data regarding the technique of sublobar resection (i.e., wedge resection versus segmentectomy). Specific subgroups of NSCLC, namely bronchioloalveolar carcinoma, may be more amenable to sublobar resection. Sophisticated methods of examining the margins may alter outcomes as well as potentially

Journal

Journal of Thoracic Oncology – Wolters Kluwer Health

Published: Oct 1, 2010

References

  • Sublobar resection: a movement from the Lung Cancer Study Group
    Blasberg
  • Randomized trial of lobectomy versus limited resection for T1 N0 non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer Study Group
    Ginsberg
  • Reply to “Randomized trial of lobectomy versus limited resection for T1 N0 non-small cell lung cancer,” 1995 article by the Lung Cancer Study Group
    Rubinstein