Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 2, 2025
Author Spotlight: A Model to Study the Systemic and Local Dynamics of CD8+ T Cells During LN Metastasis
Published on: January 26, 2024
Distinct impacts of radiological appearance on lymph node metastasis and prognosis based on solid size in clinical T1
Zhihua Li1, Cheng Pan1, Wenzheng Xu1
1Department of Thoracic Surgery, Jiangsu Province Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 300 Guangzhou Road, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, China.
Background:
Solid nodules (SN) had more aggressive features and a poorer prognosis than part-solid nodules (PSN). This study aimed to evaluate the specific impacts of nodule radiological appearance (SN vs. PSN) on lymph node metastasis and prognosis based on solid size in cT1 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
Methods:
Patients with cT1 NSCLC who underwent anatomical resection between 2010 and 2019 were retrospectively screened. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were adopted to evaluate the associations between nodule radiological appearance and lymph node metastasis. The log-rank test and Cox regression analyses were applied for prognostic evaluation. The cumulative recurrence risk was evaluated by the competing risk model.
Results:
There were 958 and 665 NSCLC patients with PSN and SN. Compared to the PSN group, the SN arm had a higher overall lymph node metastasis rate (21.7% vs. 2.7%, P < 0.001), including nodal metastasis at N1 stations (17.7% vs. 2.1%), N2 stations (14.0% vs. 1.6%), and skip nodal metastasis (3.9% vs. 0.6%). However, for cT1a NSCLC, no significant difference existed between SN and PSN (0 vs. 0.4%, P = 1). In addition, the impacts of nodule radiological appearance on lymph node metastasis varied between nodal stations. Solid NSCLC had an inferior prognosis than part-solid patients (5-year disease-free survival: 79.3% vs. 96.2%, P < 0.001). The survival inferiority only existed for cT1b and cT1c NSCLC, but not for cT1a. Strikingly, even for patients with nodal involvement, SN still had a poorer disease-free survival (P = 0.048) and a higher cumulative incidence of recurrence (P < 0.001) than PSN. Specifically, SN had a higher recurrence risk than PSN at each site. Nevertheless, the distribution of recurrences between SN and PSN was similar, except that N2 lymph node recurrences were more frequent in solid NSCLC (28.21% vs. 7.69%, P = 0.041).
Conclusion:
SN had higher risks of lymph node metastasis and poorer prognosis than PSN for cT1b and cT1c NSCLC, but not for cT1a. SN exhibited a greater proportion of N2 lymph node recurrence than PSN. SN and PSN needed distinct strategies for nodal evaluation and postoperative follow-up.
