Prognostic classification with laboratory parameters or imaging techniques in small-cell lung cancer

Clin Lung Cancer. 2007 May;8(6):376-81. doi: 10.3816/CLC.2007.n.018.

Abstract

Purpose: Our aim in this study was to compare prognostic models based on laboratory tests with a model including imaging information in small-cell lung cancer.

Patients and methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 156 consecutive patients. Three existing models based on laboratory tests and performance status (PS) and a model based on disease stage assessed by imaging techniques and PS were tested with Cox regression analysis.

Results: The 3 laboratory-based models and the imaging-based model were significant in predicting prognosis in our patient group, with hazard ratios of 1.6-3 for medium prognosis groups and 2.6-6.1 for poor prognosis groups compared with good prognosis groups. Models based on laboratory tests appear to predict survival probabilities at least as well as a model with information from imaging techniques.

Conclusion: Prognostic models using PS and laboratory tests provide a similar estimation of survival of patients with small-cell lung cancer as the combination of PS and disease stage assessed by imaging tests.

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Carcinoma, Small Cell / classification*
  • Carcinoma, Small Cell / diagnostic imaging
  • Carcinoma, Small Cell / mortality
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Lung Neoplasms / classification*
  • Lung Neoplasms / diagnostic imaging
  • Lung Neoplasms / mortality
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Models, Biological
  • Prognosis
  • Retrospective Studies
  • Survival Rate
  • Tomography, X-Ray Computed*