PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 21, 2026Thoracic Cancer0 citationsOpen Access

Clinical Versus Pathologic Staging in Early‐Stage Non‐Small Cell Lung Cancer Assessed by an Established Lung Cancer Multidisciplinary Meeting

View Full Paper
JNJ D NolanThe University of QueenslandTSTheron SatherPrincess Alexandra HospitalCHCraig HukinsThe University of Queensland

Key Points

  • This research examines discrepancies between clinical and pathologic staging in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and their implications for patient care.
  • Assess staging accuracy through clinical and pathologic evaluations in early-stage NSCLC patients.
  • Analyze the impact of staging discrepancies on treatment outcomes and patient morbidity.
  • Evaluate the role of timeliness in care delivery and staging assessments.
  • Identified significant mismatches between clinical and pathologic staging in a portion of patients.
  • Observed that under-staging correlates with increased risks of morbidity and mortality.
  • Recommended the integration of routine concordance assessments in lung cancer multidisciplinary meetings (MDTs).

Abstract

For patients diagnosed with early-stage NSCLC referred for curative surgical management, disagreement between clinical and pathologic staging may be due to treatment delay and malignancy histopathological features. Clinically under-staging increases risk of morbidity and mortality, which could be addressed through improved timeliness of care. Concordance of clinical and pathologic staging should be a routinely assessed benchmark for all lung cancer MDTs.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Nolan et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69be38b56e48c4981c6794eahttps://doi.org/10.1111/1759-7714.70267
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper