Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Meta-analysis of surgical resection for lung neuroendocrine tumors

Meta-analysis of surgical resection for lung neuroendocrine tumors
Photo by Dan Meyers / Unsplash
Key Takeaway
Consider that lobectomy and sub-lobar resection show similar survival for lung neuroendocrine tumors, but lymph node assessment differs.

This is a meta-analysis of six observational studies examining surgical resection for lung neuroendocrine tumors. The scope was to compare lobectomy versus sub-lobar resection (segmentectomy or wedge resection) for overall survival and lymph node assessment. The pooled 5-year overall survival for the entire cohort of 3700 patients was 78.8% (95% CI, 76.6-81.1). For the primary outcome, there was no statistically significant difference in overall survival between lobectomy and sub-lobar resection (HR = 1.21; 95% CI, 0.80-1.83; I² = 0%). Segmentectomy showed comparable survival to lobectomy (p = 0.38), while wedge resection was associated with higher mortality (HR = 2.02; 95% CI, 1.64-2.49; I² = 0%). Lobectomy was more frequently associated with lymph node sampling (>10 nodes) than sub-lobar resection (29.1% vs 7.4%) and with a higher rate of nodal pathologic upstaging (6.2% vs 2.2%). The authors acknowledge limitations, including only six included studies and heterogeneity not fully assessed beyond I² for some outcomes. Practice relevance suggests sub-lobar resection and lobectomy show no clear difference in overall survival, but adequate lymph node assessment remains essential. The findings are from observational data and show association, not causation.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
Sample sizen = 3,700
EvidenceLevel 1
Follow-up60.0 mo
PublishedApr 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
INTRODUCTION: Lung neuroendocrine tumors (LNETs) are rare, with surgical resection as the mainstay of treatment, although the optimal extent remains uncertain. Herein, we present the first meta-analysis to assess the effect of resection extent (lobar vs. sub-lobar) on overall survival. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the literature to identify studies comparing overall survival following lobectomy versus sub-lobar resection in LNETs. An inverse-variance meta-analysis was performed, and a Cox regression model was applied to reconstructed time-to-event data estimated from published Kaplan-Meier curves to generate pooled survival estimates. RESULTS: Six studies encompassing 3,700 patients (lobectomy, n = 2,409; sub-lobar resection, n = 1,291) were included in the final analysis. The pooled 5-year overall survival for the entire cohort was 78.8% (95% CI, 76.6-81.1). No statistically significant difference in overall survival was observed between lobectomy and sub-lobar resection (HR = 1.21; 95% CI, 0.80-1.83; I = 0%). Segmentectomy and lobectomy demonstrated comparable survival (p = 0.38), whereas wedge resection was associated with higher mortality (HR = 2.02; 95% CI, 1.64-2.49; I = 0%). Sampling of >10 lymph nodes was more frequent in lobectomy than sub-lobar resection (29.1% [95% CI, 0.8-95.3] vs 7.4% [95% CI, 0.01-98], respectively), likely contributing to the higher rate of nodal pathologic upstaging observed in the lobectomy group (6.2% [95% CI, 0.2-64.9] vs 2.2% [95% CI, 0-99]). CONCLUSION: In this first meta-analysis of surgical resection for LNETs, sub-lobar resection and lobectomy showed no clear difference in overall survival. Adequate lymph node assessment remains essential, irrespective of the surgical approach.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.