You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 154 No. 21, 14 November 1994 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Review Articles
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (18)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Lung Cancer Surgery

A Critical Review of the Evidence

Frank A. Lederle, MD; Dennis E. Niewoehner, MD

Arch Intern Med. 1994;154(21):2397-2400.


Abstract

Surgery is generally considered to be the treatment of choice for anatomically localized non—small-cell lung cancer, but its effectiveness remains unproven. Observational studies have been of limited value because the criteria by which patients are selected for surgery create substantial differences between patients who undergo surgery and those who do not. One small randomized trial of surgery vs radiotherapy was inconclusive, but several large trials of lung cancer screening have provided indirect evidence against a benefit from surgery. Two ongoing randomized trials, one on extensive vs limited resection and the other on the effect of surgery in more extensive disease, may provide further insight into the effectiveness of surgery in the treatment of localized non—small-cell lung cancer. Development of a large randomized trial to directly assess the effectiveness of surgery in the treatment of localized non—small-cell lung cancer has been precluded by ethical concerns, but may need to be reconsidered if indicated by the findings of the two ongoing studies. (Arch Intern Med. 1994;154:2397-2400)



Author Affiliations

From the Department of Medicine, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, University of Minnesota.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Evaluation of Patients With Pulmonary Nodules: When Is It Lung Cancer?: ACCP Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (2nd Edition)
Gould et al.
Chest 2007;132:108S-130S.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

When in doubt should we cut it out? The role of surgery in non-small cell lung cancer.
Holty and Gould
Thorax 2006;61:554-556.
FULL TEXT  

Surgery for non-small cell lung cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Wright et al.
Thorax 2006;61:597-603.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Screening for Lung Cancer: A Review of the Current Literature
Bach et al.
Chest 2003;123 :72S-82S.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Uncertainty in Prostate Cancer Care: The Physician's Role in Clearing the Confusion
Wilt
JAMA 2000;283:3258-3260.
FULL TEXT  

Controversies in Prostate Cancer Screening: Analogies to the Early Lung Cancer Screening Debate
Collins and Barry
JAMA 1996;276:1976-1979.
ABSTRACT  

Multimodality Therapy in Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Edelman et al.
Ann. Thorac. Surg. 1996;61:1564-1572.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1994 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.