Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Impact of micropapillary histologic subtype in selecting limited resection vs lobectomy for lung adenocarcinoma of 2cm or smaller.

BACKGROUND: We sought to analyze the prognostic significance of the new International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC), American Thoracic Society (ATS), and European Respiratory Society (ERS) lung adenocarcinoma (ADC) classification for patients undergoing resection for small (≤2cm) lung ADC and to investigate whether histologic subtyping can predict recurrence after limited resection (LR) vs lobectomy (LO).

METHODS: Comprehensive histologic subtyping was performed according to the IASLC/ATS/ERS classification on all consecutive patients who underwent LR or LO for small lung ADC between 1995 and 2009 at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. Clinical characteristics and pathologic data were retrospectively evaluated for 734 consecutive patients (LR: 258; LO: 476). Cumulative incidence of recurrence (CIR) was calculated using competing risks analysis and compared across groups using Grey's test. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS: Application of IASLC/ATS/ERS lung ADC histologic subtyping to predict recurrence demonstrates that, in the LR group but not in the LO group, micropapillary (MIP) component of 5% or greater was associated with an increased risk of recurrence, compared with MIP component of less than 5% (LR: 5-year CIR = 34.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 23.5% to 49.7% vs 5-year CIR = 12.4%, 95% CI = 6.9% to 22.1%, P < .001; LO: 5-year CIR = 19.1%, 95% CI = 12.0% to 30.5% vs 15-year CIR = 12.9%, 95% CI = 7.6% to 21.9%, P = .13). In the LR group, among patients with tumors with an MIP component of 5% or greater, most recurrences (63.4%) were locoregional; MIP component of 5% or greater was statistically significantly associated with increased risk of local recurrence when the surgical margin was less than 1cm (5-year CIR = 32.0%, 95% CI = 18.6% to 46.0% for MIP ≥ 5% vs 5-year CIR = 7.6%, 95% CI = 2.3% to 15.6% for MIP < 5%; P = .007) but not when surgical margin was 1cm or greater (5-year CIR = 13.0%, 95% CI = 4.1% to 22.1% for MIP ≥ 5% vs 5-year CIR = 3.4%, 95% CI = 0% to 7.7% for MIP < 5%; P = .10).

CONCLUSIONS: Application of the IASLC/ATS/ERS classification identifies the presence of an MIP component of 5% or greater as independently associated with the risk of recurrence in patients treated with LR.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app