Back

The impact of preoperative imaging strategies in EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer: a multicenter retrospective review

Lee, J.; Rafizadeh, M.; Bogdan, S.; Altorki, N.; Garcia, C.; Saxena, A.; Parang, B.

2025-11-02 oncology
10.1101/2025.10.30.25339077 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundThe ADAURA trial demonstrated an overall survival benefit with adjuvant osimertinib in epidermal growth factor receptor-mutant (EGFR-mut) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). As only 50% of patients underwent a preoperative brain MRI scan and PET-CT rates were not reported, concerns were raised that suboptimal staging could have led to the inclusion of patients with metastatic disease. There is, however, limited data on the real-world rates and impact of preoperative PET-CT and brain MRIs in patients with EGFR-mut NSCLC. We sought to characterize preoperative imaging rates and their impact on staging. Patients and MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed patients with EGFR-mut NSCLC who were evaluated for surgery at 3 academic New York hospitals from 2016-2021. ResultsBetween 2016 and 2021,109 patients with EGFR-mut NSCLC underwent preoperative evaluation. Of these patients, 107 underwent a PET-CT and 15 (14%) were found to have stage IV disease. Sites of metastatic disease were bone (11), pleura (2), liver (1), and intrapulmonary (1). Thirty-nine patients had stage II or III disease; of those, 23 underwent a brain MRI, which revealed brain metastases in 3 patients. In total, the use of PET-CT and brain MRIs for patients evaluated for surgery upstaged 17% (18/109) of patients to metastatic disease and resulted in 83% (90/109) of patients undergoing surgery. ConclusionsThe use of preoperative PET-CT and brain MRIs led to the detection of metastatic disease in 17% of patients with EGFR-mut NSCLC. These findings underscore the critical role of comprehensive preoperative imaging for clinical practice and clinical trials.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.