Next Article in Journal
Preoperative Serum C-Reactive Protein Levels Are Elevated in Uterine Sarcoma Compared with Leiomyoma: A Retrospective Cohort Study
Previous Article in Journal
Modified Charlson Comorbidity Index to Improve Management of Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Step Towards Multiparametric Approach
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Predictors of Recurrence After Surgery in Patients with Stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

1
IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Rozzano, Italy
2
Humanitas University, 20072 Pieve Emanuele, Italy
3
Fondazione Policlinico Universitario “A. Gemelli” IRCCS, 00168 Rome, Italy
4
Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Pisana, 56124 Pisa, Italy
5
Thoracic Surgery Unit, Magna Graecia University, 88100 Catanzaro, Italy
6
Tor Vergata University Hospital, 00133 Rome, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Cancers 2026, 18(7), 1152; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers18071152
Submission received: 23 February 2026 / Revised: 31 March 2026 / Accepted: 1 April 2026 / Published: 3 April 2026

Simple Summary

Surgery represents the gold standard treatment for patients with stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, up to 30% of those may experience recurrence. This study aims to identify prognostic factors for both early and late recurrence in this subset. We retrospectively analyzed data of 1132 patients with stage IA-B NSCLC undergoing lung resection from 2013 to 2021. All the patients were treated with radical surgery, and approximately 20% of cases recurred within five years. Significant predictors of recurrence were an open approach, pT status greater than 1a and non-lepidic subtypes of adenocarcinoma.

Abstract

Background: Surgery represents the gold standard treatment for patients with stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, up to 30% of those may experience recurrence. This study aims to identify prognostic factors for both early and late recurrence in this subset. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients with stage IA-B NSCLC undergoing lung resection from 2013 to 2021 in four major lung cancer centers. Inclusion criteria were intentionally curative resections via either open or mini-invasive approaches plus lymph node dissection and a minimum follow-up of 36 months. Analyzed prognosticators included age, gender, smoking status, comorbidities, radiological appearance, surgical approach, intraoperative complications, pT stage and histologic subtypes. The overall and disease-free survivals and uni- and multivariable Cox regression for recurrence prediction were analyzed. Results: We collected data from 1132 consecutive patients (mean age 68.5 ± 8.8 years, 55.5% males and 20.1% smokers). After a mean follow-up of 57 ± 37 months, 908 (80.2%), patients were still disease-free, while the remaining 224 (19.8%) presented local (n = 86) or distant (n = 138) recurrences; 72 (32.1%) patients experienced reoccurrence within 12 months. The disease-free survival rate was significantly higher in the pT1a stage and in lepidic adenocarcinoma. The multivariable analysis and Cox regression showed that pT>1a (p = 0.001) and non-lepidic subtypes of adenocarcinoma (p < 0.001) were the best predictors of recurrence. Conclusions: Approximately one fifth of patients undergoing radical surgery for stage I NSCLC experienced recurrence within five years. Significant predictors of recurrence were a pT status greater than 1a and non-lepidic subtypes of adenocarcinoma.

1. Introduction

Lung cancer remains one of the most common malignancies worldwide, with approximately 1.8 million new diagnoses, accounting for about 13% of all cancer cases diagnosed [1]. Surgical resection represents the cornerstone of the treatment of locoregionally confined non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC; clinical stages I to III) [2]. Despite curative intentions, approximately 40–55% of lung cancer patients experience recurrence, depending on the stage of the disease [3,4,5,6]. Several studies have documented recurrence in patients who underwent surgery for stage I NSCLC. Martini et al. [7] investigated 598 patients diagnosed with stage I NSCLC and found a recurrence rate of 27%, with 60% of these recurrences occurring within two years post-surgery. Maeda et al. [8] examined 483 patients who remained recurrence-free for five years following surgery, discovering that 4.8% experienced a delayed recurrence more than 5 years following their procedure. An improved risk stratification for these patients could justify the intensification of adjuvant therapies for a subgroup of early-stage lung cancer patients deemed to be at a high risk for recurrence [9]. Nevertheless, none of these studies have identified the specific factors associated with early recurrence or identified reliable prognostic indicators following recurrence.
This study aims to identify the prognostic factors associated with early and late recurrence in patients who have undergone radical surgery for stage I NSCLC.

2. Materials and Methods

We reviewed the medical records of patients from four major lung cancer centers who underwent surgical treatment for clinical stage I NSCLC from 2013 to 2021.
Complete resection was defined as a radical procedure without any macroscopic residual lesions and with a microscopically clear margin, associated with a systematic lymph node dissection including a minimum of six nodes/stations, three of which had to be mediastinal, always including the sub-carinal station. Wedge resections with an adequate margin greater than 10 mm were also considered radical in those patients with limited residual pulmonary function and for lesions less than 15 mm in diameter. Only patients with confirmed pN0 status were eligible for analysis to ensure accuracy of the final pathological stage. Patients with multiple lung cancers (either synchronous or metachronous) and those who underwent incomplete resection were excluded from this analysis.
All patients had a histological diagnosis of NSCLC before or during surgery. Surgical approaches included open thoracotomy, video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS), and robotic-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS). All resected specimens underwent pathological examination. The histological classification included a subdivision of adenocarcinoma histotypes, and the pathologic T factor was reclassified according to the eighth edition of the Tumors, Node and Metastasis (TNM) classification system described by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) [10,11].
Collected variables included: age, gender, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities (yes/no), smoking history (ever or never), imaging appearance of the tumor on computed tomography (CT) scans (solid, ground-glass opacity, mixed), resection volume (wedge, segmentectomy, lobectomy or bilobectomy), surgical approach (open, VATS or RATS), and pT status. Early recurrence was defined as any recurrence occurring within 12 months after surgery. Local recurrence was defined as tumor relapse in the same chest cavity (including mediastinal structures and chest wall), while distant recurrence referred to tumor appearance in the other organs.
Data collected and reported in this study were retrieved from patient’s medical records and pathological and surgical registries. Follow-up data were obtained through outpatient visits, imaging studies (total body CT scan or FDG-PET scan) and phone interviews. To account for potential inter-institutional variability and temporal changes in surgical practice, additional sensitivity analyses were performed including center of treatment and calendar year of surgery as covariates in multivariable models. The data collection for this retrospective analysis was approved by the institutional review board (IRB) of Humanitas Research Hospital, and individual patient consent was obtained to authorize the use of their clinical data for research purposes and retrospective analysis in an anonymous form. The STROBE reporting recommendations were adopted in the reporting of this study [12].

Statistical Analysis

Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the demographic, clinical, surgical, and pathological characteristics of the cohort. Continuous variables were reported as mean ± standard deviation (SD) and compared using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Categorical variables were presented as counts and percentages, and differences between groups were assessed using the chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test, as appropriate. Firstly, the association of major variables with the time (early or late) and site (local or distant) of the recurrence was investigated. Then, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. DFS was defined as the time from surgery to the first recurrence (local, distant, or both) or last follow-up. DFS in the presence/absence of different factors was compared with the log-rank test. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine independent predictors of recurrence. Univariate analyses were performed to identify variables potentially associated with recurrence. Variables with a p < 0.10 in the univariate analysis were included in the multivariate analysis. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. BMI was treated as a purely descriptive variable for the available subset and was not included in any further statistical testing.
All tests were two-sided, and a p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Statistical analyses were conducted using STATA v17.0 (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA).

3. Results

We retrieved data from a total of 1132 patients; the main demographic, surgical and pathological features are summarized in Table 1.
A lobectomy was performed in 995 (88%) patients, an anatomic segmentectomy was performed in 56 (4%) and a wedge procedure was performed in 81 (7%). The majority of the operations (57.1%) were carried out through a minimally invasive approach: 552 VATSs and 106 RATSs, respectively. The open approach consisted of a standard lateral thoracotomy.
The histological classification revealed adenocarcinoma in 920 (81.3%) patients and squamous cell carcinoma in 141 (12.5%) patients. According to eighth edition of the TNM classification, 212 (18.7%) patients had stage pT1a, 402 (35.5%) had stage pT1b, 223 (19.7%) had stage pT1c and 295 (26.1%) had stage pT2a.
All the patients were followed over time with a mean follow-up of 57 ± 37 months.

3.1. Recurrences

Recurrence were observed in 224 patients (19.8%), of which 86 were local, 106 were distant-only and 32 involved both local and distant sites. Patients who experienced both local and distant recurrences simultaneously were classified and counted only within the ‘distant recurrence’ group, as this reflects the most clinically significant event.
In 72 (32.1%) patients, the recurrence occurred within one year after surgery. Patients who developed early recurrence were evaluated through a multidisciplinary approach. In cases where the recurrence was isolated, a local treatment with radical intent was considered.
Several factors were associated with early recurrence (Table 2). However, a multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of early recurrence (Table 3). After adjustments for age, sex, the pT status, histology, and the year of surgery, the surgical approach was not independently associated with early recurrence. In contrast, later pT stages and squamous histology were significantly associated with an increased risk of early recurrence, while RATS showed a statistically significant association with early recurrence. This finding should be interpreted cautiously due to the small sample size and large confidence intervals.
Regarding the site of recurrence, distant relapses were more frequent in patients undergoing lobar resection (p = 0.0001) or receiving an open approach (p = 0.007) or with a pT2a tumor (p = 0.008) (Table 4).

3.2. Survival Analysis

Overall survival rates at 12, 36, and 60 months were 98.4%, 92.1% and 89.3% (Figure 1A), respectively. Disease-free survival rates for the same intervals were 93.5%, 83.3% and 76.5%, respectively (Figure 1B).
The disease-free survival rate was significantly higher for pT1a (p = 0.002, Figure 2A) and for the lepidic/papillar adenocarcinoma histology (p = 0.0015, Figure 2B). VATS/RATS resections had better outcomes compared to the open approach, although these were not significant (p = 0.170, Figure 2C).

3.3. Cox Regression

In the univariable analysis, patients who developed recurrence were more commonly operated on via an open approach (p < 0.001), with a pT stage above 1a (p < 0.001) and non-lepidic adenocarcinoma subtypes (p < 0.001) (Table 5).
The multivariable analysis showed that an open surgery (p = 0.032), pT stage > 1a (pT1b p = 0.036; pT1c p = 0.052; pT2a p = 0.003) and non-lepidic subtype among adenocarcinomas (acinar: p = 0.012; solid: p = 0.016, other: p = 0.008) were independent predictors of recurrence (Table 5). In the primary multivariable model, the surgical approach appeared to be associated with the recurrence risk. In this adjusted model, the association between the surgical approach and recurrence was attenuated and no longer statistically significant (VATS vs open: HR 1.37, 95% CI 0.94–2.01, p = 0.102; RATS vs open: HR 1.97, 95% CI 0.91–4.27, p = 0.087). The calendar year showed a modest association with the recurrence risk (HR 1.09 per year, 95% CI 1.01–1.18, p = 0.025). Full results are reported in Supplementary Table S1.

4. Discussion

Despite having radical surgery, patients with completely resected node-negative NSCLC remain at risk for recurrence. Many retrospective studies have analyzed the risk factors for relapse in stage I NSCLC following radical resection and have attempted to develop a risk prediction model based on clinical factors and biomarkers [13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22].
In our cohort of 1132 of patients, the 5-year recurrence rate was 19.8%, consistent with previous reports [23,24]. We found that the pathological stage, particularly stages greater than IA, significantly contributed to the risk of recurrence. This aligns with findings from Zhao et al. [25], who reported similar conclusions in their study of stage I lung adenocarcinoma. We also identified strong associations between other clinic-pathological features and recurrence, specifically adenocarcinoma subtypes. Our analysis also showed that the non-lepidic subtype of adenocarcinoma was linked to a higher risk of recurrence within five years, and the multivariate analysis confirmed this finding. A recent validation study of the IASLC histologic grading system also supported these findings [16]. Woo et al. [26] demonstrated that grade 3 tumors and non-lepidic subtypes were associated with worse recurrence-free survival and overall survival [20,26].
Our analysis suggested that patients undergoing open thoracotomy may have a higher recurrence risk. However, after additional adjustments for the center and calendar year, this association is no longer significant, and the direction changes. This finding is not widely corroborated in the current literature [27]. At least several studies have suggested that the open surgery is the safer operation, and the minimally invasive approach is not inferior in terms of overall survival or the risk of recurrence in early-stage lung cancer [28,29,30]. The apparent association between the surgical approach and recurrence should therefore be interpreted cautiously. In retrospective surgical series, an open thoracotomy is often selected for patients with more complex or radiologically suspicious tumors, which may inherently carry a higher risk of recurrence. In addition, given the retrospective design and the long inclusion period (2013–2021), open surgery was more frequently performed in the earlier years of the study period, when minimally invasive approaches were less widely adopted and surgeon expertise with VATS or robotic techniques was still evolving across centers.
Our findings indicate that the association between the surgical approach and outcomes is model-dependent and loses statistical significance after adjustments for the center and calendar year, suggesting that institutional and temporal factors may partly explain the observed differences.
As far as the resection volume, we found that sublobar resection was not associated with an increased rate of local or distant recurrence. Similarly, several studies suggest that a sublobar resection may be equivalent to a lobectomy in a selected subset of patients, such as ground-glass opacities and well-differentiated tumors less than 2 cm [31,32,33]. On the other hand, Varlotto et al. reported an increase in local recurrence rates among patients who underwent a sublobar resection for moderately differentiated NSCLC tumors larger than 2 cm [34], while El-Sherif et al. found that patients with stage IB NSCLC had worse disease-free survival rates when treated with sublobar resection compared to the standard lobectomy [35]. The low percentage of sublobar resections (12.1%) in our series may suggest a strict selection of patients that justifies the results being comparable to lobar resection.
Based on the survival analysis presented in our study, the possibility of offering adjuvant therapy to selected patients should be considered, even when pathological staging indicates early-stage oncologic disease.

Limitations

The main limitation of our study is its retrospective design, as selection bias can play a role that cannot be reliably controlled. Furthermore, due to the multicenter nature of this study, the choice of surgical approach or the extent of the pulmonary resection may be influenced by the center of origin; in particular, the variable availability of robotic and minimally invasive platforms across centers may have resulted in a heterogeneous distribution of cases and should therefore be considered a potential confounding factor. We developed our multivariable analysis by selecting variables that were reported in the literature and supported by our clinical experience as potential predictors of recurrence. However, given the sample size, we were limited to including only five variables in the multivariable model.
The histopathologic classification of lung tumors has undergone major changes over the past decade, and certain features (such as spread through airspaces, STAS) were not systematically recorded at the start of our study. Given the prognostic relevance of STAS [36], further research is warranted as its reporting becomes increasingly standardized.

5. Conclusions

In our analysis, the 5-year recurrence rate is comparable to that reported in the literature, and we demonstrated that the disease-free survival rate was significantly worse for patients at stages greater than pT1a and in those with non-lepidic adenocarcinoma.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/cancers18071152/s1, Table S1. Sensitivity multivariable Cox model for recurrence, additionally adjusted for center and calendar year of surgery.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, E.V. and G.M.; methodology, E.V. and D.B.; validation, G.M., V.A. (Vincenzo Ambrogi) and M.C.; formal analysis, E.V. and D.B.; data curation, V.G., S.M., M.L., V.A. (Vittorio Aprile), M.C. and A.P.; writing—original draft preparation, E.V.; writing—review and editing, G.M. and V.A. (Vittorio Aprile). All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Review Board of the IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital (protocol code: FIRST STAGE and date of approval: 15 March 2025).

Informed Consent Statement

Every patient undergoing treatment for an oncological pathology routinely signs a written informed consent at the time of admission in all the participating centers involved in this study This consent specifically authorizes the use of their clinical data for research purposes and retrospective analysis in an anonymous form.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article/Supplementary Materials. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
NSCLCNon-Small Cell Lung Cancer
VATSVideo-Assisted Thoracic Surgery
RATSRobotic-Assisted Thoracic Surgery
TNMTumors, Node and Metastasis
CTComputed Tomography
FDG-PETFluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography
DFSDisease-Free Survival
OSOverall Survival
STASSpread Through Airspaces

References

  1. Postmus, P.E.; Kerr, K.M.; Oudkerk, M.; Senan, S.; Waller, D.A.; Vansteenkiste, J.; Escriu, C.; Peters, S.; ESMO Guidelines Committee. Early and locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann. Oncol. 2017, 28, iv1–iv21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Howington, J.A.; Blum, M.G.; Chang, A.C.; Balekian, A.A.; Murthy, S.C. Treatment of stage I and II non-small cell lung cancer: Diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Chest 2013, 143, e278S–e313S. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Al-Kattan, K.; Sepsas, E.; Fountain, S.W.; Townsend, E.R. Disease recurrence after resection for stage I lung cancer. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 1997, 12, 380–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Carnio, S.; Novello, S.; Papotti, M.; Loiacono, M.; Scagliotti, G.V. Prognostic and predictive biomarkers in early stage non-small cell lung cancer: Tumor based approaches including gene signatures. Transl. Lung Cancer Res. 2013, 2, 372–381. [Google Scholar]
  5. Thornblade, L.W.; Mulligan, M.S.; Odem-Davis, K.; Hwang, B.; Waworuntu, R.L.; Wolff, E.M.; Kessler, L.; Wood, D.E.; Farjah, F. Challenges in Predicting Recurrence After Resection of Node-Negative Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2018, 106, 1460–1467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Wei, W.; Zhou, J.; Zhang, Q.; Liao, D.; Liu, Q.; Zhong, B.; Liang, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Jiang, R.; Liu, G.; et al. Postoperative intensity-modulated radiation therapy reduces local recurrence and improves overall survival in III-N2 non-small-cell lung cancer: A single-center, retrospective study. Cancer Med. 2020, 9, 2820–2832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Martini, N.; Bains, M.S.; Burt, M.E.; Zakowski, M.F.; McCormack, P.; Rusch, V.W.; Ginsberg, R.J. Incidence of local recurrence and second primary tumors in resected stage I lung cancer. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 1995, 109, 120–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Maeda, R.; Yoshida, J.; Ishii, G.; Aokage, K.; Hishida, T.; Nishimura, M.; Nishiwaki, Y.; Nagai, K. Long-term outcome and late recurrence in patients with completely resected stage IA non-small cell lung cancer. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2010, 5, 1246–1250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Liang, W.; Zhang, L.; Jiang, G.; Wang, Q.; Liu, L.; Liu, D.; Wang, Z.; Zhu, Z.; Deng, Q.; Xiong, X.; et al. Development and validation of a nomogram for predicting survival in patients with resected non-small-cell lung cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 2015, 33, 861–869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Yatabe, Y.; Dacic, S.; Borczuk, A.C.; Warth, A.; Russell, P.A.; Lantuejoul, S.; Beasley, M.B.; Thunnissen, E.; Pelosi, G.; Rekhtman, N.; et al. Best Practices Recommendations for Diagnostic Immunohistochemistry in Lung Cancer. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2019, 14, 377–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Travis, W.D.; Asamura, H.; Bankier, A.A.; Beasley, M.B.; Detterbeck, F.; Flieder, D.B.; Goo, J.M.; MacMahon, H.; Naidich, D.; Nicholson, A.G.; et al. The IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project: Proposals for Coding T Categories for Subsolid Nodules and Assessment of Tumor Size in Part-Solid Tumors in the Forthcoming Eighth Edition of the TNM Classification of Lung Cancer. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2016, 11, 1204–1223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Cuschieri, S. The STROBE guidelines. Saudi J. Anaesth. 2019, 13, S31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Kiankhooy, A.; Taylor, M.D.; LaPar, D.J.; Isbell, J.M.; Lau, C.L.; Kozower, B.D.; Jones, D.R. Predictors of early recurrence for node-negative t1 to t2b non-small cell lung cancer. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2014, 98, 1175–1183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Chen, Y.-Y.; Huang, T.-W.; Tsai, W.-C.; Lin, L.-F.; Cheng, J.-B.; Chang, H.; Lee, S.-C. Risk factors of postoperative recurrences in patients with clinical stage I NSCLC. World J. Surg. Oncol. 2014, 12, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Fick, C.N.; Dunne, E.G.; Vanstraelen, S.; Toumbacaris, N.; Tan, K.S.; Rocco, G.; Molena, D.; Huang, J.; Park, B.J.; Rekhtman, N.; et al. High-risk features associated with recurrence in stage I lung adenocarcinoma. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2025, 169, 436–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Moreira, A.L.; Ocampo, P.S.; Xia, Y.; Zhong, H.; Russell, P.A.; Minami, Y.; Cooper, W.A.; Yoshida, A.; Bubendorf, L.; Papotti, M.; et al. A Grading System for Invasive Pulmonary Adenocarcinoma: A Proposal from the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Pathology Committee. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2020, 15, 1599–1610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Kadota, K.; Colovos, C.; Suzuki, K.; Rizk, N.P.; Dunphy, M.P.S.; Zabor, E.C.; Sima, C.S.; Yoshizawa, A.; Travis, W.D.; Rusch, V.W.; et al. FDG-PET SUVmax combined with IASLC/ATS/ERS histologic classification improves the prognostic stratification of patients with stage I lung adenocarcinoma. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2012, 19, 3598–3605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Caso, R.; Sanchez-Vega, F.; Tan, K.S.; Mastrogiacomo, B.; Zhou, J.; Jones, G.D.; Nguyen, B.; Schultz, N.; Connolly, J.G.; Brandt, W.S.; et al. The Underlying Tumor Genomics of Predominant Histologic Subtypes in Lung Adenocarcinoma. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2020, 15, 1844–1856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Jiang, L.; Liang, W.; Shen, J.; Chen, X.; Shi, X.; He, J.; Yang, C.; He, J. The impact of visceral pleural invasion in node-negative non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Chest 2015, 148, 903–911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Woo, W.; Cha, Y.J.; Kim, B.J.; Moon, D.H.; Lee, S. Validation Study of New IASLC Histology Grading System in Stage I Non-Mucinous Adenocarcinoma Comparing with Minimally Invasive Adenocarcinoma. Clin. Lung Cancer 2022, 23, e435–e442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Tuminello, S.; Veluswamy, R.; Lieberman-Cribbin, W.; Gnjatic, S.; Petralia, F.; Wang, P.; Flores, R.; Taioli, E. Prognostic value of immune cells in the tumor microenvironment of early-stage lung cancer: A meta-analysis. Oncotarget 2019, 10, 7142–7155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Shahid, M.; Choi, T.G.; Nguyen, M.N.; Matondo, A.; Jo, Y.H.; Yoo, J.Y.; Nguyen, N.N.Y.; Yun, H.R.; Kim, J.; Akter, S.; et al. An 8-gene signature for prediction of prognosis and chemoresponse in non-small cell lung cancer. Oncotarget 2016, 7, 86561–86572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Merritt, R.E.; Abdel-Rasoul, M.; Fitzgerald, M.; D’Souza, D.M.; Kneuertz, P.J. Nomograms for Predicting Overall and Recurrence-free Survival from Pathologic Stage IA and IB Lung Cancer After Lobectomy. Clin. Lung Cancer 2021, 22, e574–e583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Lou, F.; Huang, J.; Sima, C.S.; Dycoco, J.; Rusch, V.; Bach, P.B. Patterns of recurrence and second primary lung cancer in early-stage lung cancer survivors followed with routine computed tomography surveillance. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2013, 145, 75–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Zhao, Z.-R.; Xi, S.-Y.; Li, W.; Situ, D.-R.; Chen, K.-M.; Yang, H.; Su, X.-D.; Lin, Y.-B.; Long, H. Prognostic impact of pattern-based grading system by the new IASLC/ATS/ERS classification in Asian patients with stage I lung adenocarcinoma. Lung Cancer Amst. Neth. 2015, 90, 604–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Woo, W.; Yang, Y.H.; Cha, Y.J.; Moon, D.H.; Shim, H.S.; Cho, A.; Kim, B.J.; Kim, H.E.; Park, B.J.; Lee, J.G.; et al. Prognosis of resected invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma compared with the IASLC histologic grading system for invasive nonmucinous adenocarcinoma: Surgical database study in the TKIs era in Korea. Thorac. Cancer 2022, 13, 3310–3321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Kneuertz, P.J.; D’Souza, D.M.; Richardson, M.; Abdel-Rasoul, M.; D Moffatt-Bruce, S.; Merritt, R.E. Long-term oncological outcomes after robotic lobectomy for eraly-stage no-small-cell lung cancer versu video-assisted thoracoscopic and opern thoracotomy apprach. Clin. Lung Cancer 2020, 21, 214–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Whitson, B.A.; Groth, S.S.; Duval, S.J.; Swanson, S.J.; Maddaus, M.A. Surgery for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: A systematic review of the video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus thoracotomy approaches to lobectomy. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2008, 86, 2008–2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Lee, P.C.; Nasar, A.; Port, J.L.; Paul, S.; Stiles, B.; Chiu, Y.-L.; Andrews, W.G.; Altorki, N.K. Long-term survival after lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer by video-assisted thoracic surgery versus thoracotomy. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2013, 96, 951–961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Yang, H.-X.; Woo, K.M.; Sima, C.S.; Bains, M.S.; Adusumilli, P.S.; Huang, J.; Finley, D.J.; Rizk, N.P.; Rusch, V.W.; Jones, D.R.; et al. Long-term Survival Based on the Surgical Approach to Lobectomy For Clinical Stage I Nonsmall Cell Lung Cancer: Comparison of Robotic, Video-assisted Thoracic Surgery, and Thoracotomy Lobectomy. Ann. Surg. 2017, 265, 431–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kozu, Y.; Maniwa, T.; Takahashi, S.; Isaka, M.; Ohde, Y.; Nakajima, T. Risk factors for both recurrence and survival in patients with pathological stage I non-small-cell lung cancer. Eur. J. Cardio-Thorac. Surg. 2013, 44, e53–e58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
  32. Altorki, N.; Wang, X.; Kozono, D.; Watt, C.; Landrenau, R.; Wigle, D.; Port, J.; Jones, D.R.; Conti, M.; Ashrafi, A.S.; et al. Lobar or Sublobar Resection for Peripheral Stage IA Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2023, 388, 489–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Saji, H.; Okada, M.; Tsuboi, M.; Nakajima, R.; Suzuki, K.; Aokage, K.; Aoki, T.; Okami, J.; Yoshino, I.; Ito, H.; et al. Segmentectomy versus lobectomy in small-sized peripheral non-small-cell lung cancer (JCOG0802/WJOG4607L): A multicentre, open-label, phase 3, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2022, 399, 1607–1617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Varlotto, J.M.; Medford-Davis, L.N.; Recht, A.; Flickinger, J.; Yao, N.; Hess, C.; Reed, M.F.; Toth, J.; Zander, D.S.; DeCamp, M.M. Identification of Stage I Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Patients at High Risk for Local Recurrence Following Sublobar Resection. Chest 2013, 143, 1365–1377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. El-Sherif, A.; Gooding, W.E.; Santos, R.; Pettiford, B.; Ferson, P.F.; Fernando, H.C.; Urda, S.J.; Luketich, J.D.; Landreneau, R.J. Outcomes of sublobar resection versus lobectomy for stage I non-small cell lung cancer: A 13-year analysis. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2006, 82, 408–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Kadota, K.; Nitadori, J.; Sima, C.S.; Ujiie, H.; Rizk, N.P.; Jones, D.R.; Adusumilli, P.S.; Travis, W.D. Tumor spread through air spaces is an important pattern of invasion and impacts the frequency and location of recurrences after limited resection for small stage I lung adenocarcinomas. J. Thorac. Oncol. 2015, 10, 806–814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Overall survival (A) and disease-free survival (B).
Figure 1. Overall survival (A) and disease-free survival (B).
Cancers 18 01152 g001
Figure 2. Disease-free survival by pathological T Status (8th TNM) (A), adenocarcinoma subtypes’ histology (B) and surgical approach (C). p-values were calculated using the global log-rank test.
Figure 2. Disease-free survival by pathological T Status (8th TNM) (A), adenocarcinoma subtypes’ histology (B) and surgical approach (C). p-values were calculated using the global log-rank test.
Cancers 18 01152 g002
Table 1. Clinico-pathologic characteristics of all patients (n = 1132).
Table 1. Clinico-pathologic characteristics of all patients (n = 1132).
VariablesValue%
Age at surgery (mean ± SD)68 ± 8.8
Gender (male)62955.5%
Body mass index (kg/m2) *24.6 ± 5.4
Comorbidity (none)30026.5%
Smoke
Never40035.3%
Ex49543.7%
Current22720.1%
Unknown100.9%
CT appearance
Solid75867%
Ground-glass16414.5%
Mixed14713%
Unknown635.5%
Surgical approach
Open47441.9%
VATS55248.7%
RATS1069.4%
Resection volume
Lobectomy/bilobectomy99587.9%
Segmentectomy564.9%
Wedge817.2%
pT status (8th TNM)
1a21218.7%
1b40235.5%
1c22319.7%
2a29526.1%
Histology
Adenocarcinoma92081.3%
Squamous carcinoma14112.5%
Other716.2%
Subtype of adenocarcinoma
Lepidic28525.2%
Acinar26423.3%
Papillar958.4%
Solid14713%
Other13411.8%
NA20718.3%
* These data refer only to 761 patients. NA: missing data.
Table 2. Univariate analysis of demographic and clinico-pathologic features of patients with early and late recurrence.
Table 2. Univariate analysis of demographic and clinico-pathologic features of patients with early and late recurrence.
Univariate Analysis
Early
Recurrence
Late
Recurrence
p
N72152
Age73 (60–77)70 (61–77)0.015
Gender (male)52 (72.2%)89 (58.5%)0.048
Surgical approach 0.005
Open 29 (40.3%)89 (58.6%)
VATS 35 (48.6%)59 (38.8%)
RATS 8 (11.1%)4 (2.6%)
Resection volume 0.469
Lobectomy/bilobectomy59 (81.9%)132 (86.9)
Segmentectomy3 (4.2%)7 (4.6%)
Wedge10 (13.9%)13 (8.5)
pT status (8th TNM) 0.246
1a11 (15.3%)11 (7.2%)
1b23 (31.9%)60 (39.5%)
1c13 (18.1%)31 (20.4%)
2a25 (34.7%)50 (32.9%)
Histology 0.029
Adenocarcinoma54 (75%)132 (86.8%)
Squamous carcinoma13 (18.1%)10 (6.6%)
Other5 (6.9%)10 (6.6%)
Subtype of adenocarcinoma 0.118
Lepidic6 (8.3%)25 (16.3%)
Acinar16 (22.2%)50 (32.7%)
Papillar2 (2.8%)12 (7.8%)
Solid15 (20.8%)24 (16.3%)
Other15 (20.8%)23 (15%)
NA18 (25.1%)18 (11.9%)
NA: missing data.
Table 3. Multivariable logistic regression for early recurrence (≤12 months).
Table 3. Multivariable logistic regression for early recurrence (≤12 months).
VariableAdjusted OR95% CIp-Value
Surgical Approach
VATS vs Open1.590.79–3.200.190
RATS vs Open4.811.16–19.870.030
pT Status
1b vs 1a0.200.07–0.590.004
1c vs 1a0.190.06–0.650.008
2a vs 1a0.230.08–0.710.010
Histology
Squamous vs Adeno2.721.05–7.030.039
Other vs Adeno1.320.41–4.320.642
Age1.030.99–1.070.114
Female vs Male0.570.30–1.100.094
Year1.080.94–1.240.265
Table 4. Univariate analysis of demographic and clinico-pathologic features of patients with local and distant recurrence.
Table 4. Univariate analysis of demographic and clinico-pathologic features of patients with local and distant recurrence.
Univariate Analysis
Local
Recurrence
Distant *
Recurrence
p
N86138
Age73 (60–77)70 (61–77)0.059
Gender (male)57 (66.2%)84 (60.8%)0.425
Surgical approach 0.007
Open53 (61.6%)65 (47.1%)
VATS33 (38.4%)61 (44.2%)
RATS0 (0%)12 (8.7%)
Resection volume 0.0001
Lobectomy/bilobectomy63 (73.3%)128 (92.7%)
Segmentectomy7 (8.1%)3 (2.2%)
Wedge16 (18.6%)7 (5.1%)
pT status (8th TNM) 0.008
1a14 (16.3%)8 (5.8%)
1b35 (40.7%)48 (34.8%)
1c18 (20.9%)26 (18.8%)
2a19 (22.1%)56 (40.6%)
Histology 0.198
Adenocarcinoma76 (88.4%)110 (79.7%)
Squamous carcinoma7 (8.1%)16 (11.6%)
Other3 (3.5%)12 (8.7%)
Subtype of adenocarcinoma 0.084
Lepidic6 (7%)25 (18.1%)
Acinar28 (32.5%)38 (27.5%)
Papillar8 (9.3%)6 (4.3%)
Solid16 (18.6%)23 (16.7%)
Other18 (20.9%)20 (14.5%)
NA10 (11.7%)26 (18.9%)
* Including patients who experienced both distant-only and local and distant recurrences simultaneously. NA: missing data.
Table 5. Univariable and multivariable analyses for recurrence in the overall cohort of patients (Cox proportional hazards model).
Table 5. Univariable and multivariable analyses for recurrence in the overall cohort of patients (Cox proportional hazards model).
Univariate AnalysisMultivariate Analysis
RecurrenceNo
Recurrence
pHR (95%CI)
N224908
Age69.52 ± 9.4468.25 ± 8.760.0571.01 (0.99–1.03)0.184
Gender (male)141 (62.9%)488 (53.7%)0.0130.67 (0.49–0.91)0.010
Body mass index (kg/m2) *24.7 ± 3.6 (N = 124)24.6 ± 3.1 (N = 637)0.802
Comorbidity53 (34.7%)247 (37.0%)0.315
Smoke 0.482
Never78 (35.3%)322 (35.7%)
Ex104 (47.1%)391 (43.4%)
Current39 (17.7%)188 (20.9%)
CT appearance 0.285
Solid166 (74.7%)592 (69.9%)
Ground-glass32 (14.4%)132 (15.6%)
Mixed24 (10.8%)123 (14.5%)
Surgical approach <0.001
Open118 (52.7%)356(39.0%) 1 (ref)
VATS94 (42.0%)458 (50.4%) 0.71 (0.52–0.97)0.032
RATS12 (5.4%)94 (10.3%) 0.57 (0.29–1.17)0.169
Resection volume 0.127
Lobectomy/bilobectomy191804
Segmentectomy2358
Wedge1046
Intraoperative
complications
63 (28.1%)227 (25.1%)0.508
pT status (8th TNM) <0.001
1a22(9.8%)190 (20.9%) 1 (ref)
1b83 (37.0%)319 (35.1%) 1.68 (1.03–2.72)0.036
1c44 (19.6%)179 (19.7%) 1.70 (1.00–2.89)0.052
2a75 (33.5%)220 (24.2%) 2.16 (1.31–3.55)0.003
Histology 0.557
Adenocarcinoma186 (83.0%)735 (80.9%)
Squamous carcinoma23 (10.3%)117 (12.9%)
other15 (6.7%)56 (6.2%)
Subtype of adenocarcinoma <0.001
Lepidic31 (13.8%)254 (28.0%) 1 (ref)
Acinar66 (29.5%)198 (21.8%) 1.76 (1.13–2.73)0.012
Papillar14 (6.2%)81 (8.9%) 0.97 (0.51–1.85)0.931
Solid39 (17.4%)108 (11.9%) 1.81 (1.12–2.93)0.016
Not applicable38 (17.0%)96 (10.6%) 1.97 (1.19–3.25)0.008
* These data refer only to 761 patients.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Voulaz, E.; Brascia, D.; Giudici, V.; Margaritora, S.; Lucchi, M.; Aprile, V.; Chiappetta, M.; Patirelis, A.; Ambrogi, V.; Marulli, G. Predictors of Recurrence After Surgery in Patients with Stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Cancers 2026, 18, 1152. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers18071152

AMA Style

Voulaz E, Brascia D, Giudici V, Margaritora S, Lucchi M, Aprile V, Chiappetta M, Patirelis A, Ambrogi V, Marulli G. Predictors of Recurrence After Surgery in Patients with Stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Cancers. 2026; 18(7):1152. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers18071152

Chicago/Turabian Style

Voulaz, Emanuele, Debora Brascia, Veronica Giudici, Stefano Margaritora, Marco Lucchi, Vittorio Aprile, Marco Chiappetta, Alexandro Patirelis, Vincenzo Ambrogi, and Giuseppe Marulli. 2026. "Predictors of Recurrence After Surgery in Patients with Stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer" Cancers 18, no. 7: 1152. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers18071152

APA Style

Voulaz, E., Brascia, D., Giudici, V., Margaritora, S., Lucchi, M., Aprile, V., Chiappetta, M., Patirelis, A., Ambrogi, V., & Marulli, G. (2026). Predictors of Recurrence After Surgery in Patients with Stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. Cancers, 18(7), 1152. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers18071152

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop