Diagnosis of Lung Cancer in Small Biopsies and Cytology: Implications of the 2011 International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer/American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society Classification
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center1, University of Grenoble2, University of Tsukuba3, Imperial College London4, Wake Forest University5, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research6, Fox Chase Cancer Center7, University of Colorado Boulder8, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center9, Flinders University10, University of Aberdeen11, University of Jena12, Duke University13, VU University Amsterdam14, University of Toronto15
01 May 2013-Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine (College of American Pathologists)-Vol. 137, Iss: 5, pp 668-684
TL;DR: The new International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer/American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society lung adenocarcinoma classification provides, for the first time, standardized terminology for lung cancer diagnosis in small biopsies and cytology; this was not primarily addressed by previous World Health Organization classifications.
Abstract: The new International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer/American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society lung adenocarcinoma classification provides, for the first time, standardized terminology for lung cancer diagnosis in small biopsies and cytology; this was not primarily addressed by previous World Health Organization classifications. Until recently there have been no therapeutic implications to further classification of NSCLC, so little attention has been given to the distinction of adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma in small tissue samples. This situation has changed dramatically in recent years with the discovery of several therapeutic options that are available only to patients with adenocarcinoma or NSCLC, not otherwise specified, rather than squamous cell carcinoma. This includes recommendation for use of special stains as an aid to diagnosis, particularly in the setting of poorly differentiated tumors that do not show clear differentiation by routine light microscopy. A lim...
Citations
More filters
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center1, French Institute of Health and Medical Research2, Columbia University Medical Center3, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai4, Brigham and Women's Hospital5, University of Pittsburgh6, Fox Chase Cancer Center7, University of Mississippi Medical Center8, University of Colorado Boulder9, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary10, University of Tsukuba11, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center12
TL;DR: The 2015 World Health Organization (WHO) Classification of Tumors of the Lung, Pleura, Thymus and Heart has just been published with numerous important changes from the 2004 WHO classification.
3,029 citations
Cites background or methods from "Diagnosis of Lung Cancer in Small B..."
..., TTF-1 and P40 or P63).(11,21) Thus a simple panel of TTF-1 and p40 may be able to classify most NSCC NOS cases....
[...]
...• Nuclear atypia is absent or inconspicuous • Septal widening with sclerosis/elastosis is common, particularly in nonmucinous adenocarcinoma in situ aModified from the articles by Travis et al.1,7,11 Copyright © 2015 by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer 1249Copyright © 2015 by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer primary lung adenocarcinomas that are lepidic predominant invasive adenocarcinoma should be called “adenocarcinoma, lepidic subtype” or “lepidic adenocarcinoma” with mention of the percentage of the lepidic component and listing of each of the other patterns present with their estimated percentage....
[...]
...In relation to squamous differentiation, P40 is reported as the most specific and sensitive squamous marker.18–20 Other previously recommended antibodies include cytokeratin 5/6 and P63....
[...]
...Modified from the articles by Travis et al.(1,7,11) Metastasis of colorectal cancer should be carefully excluded with judicious immunohistochemical stains and clinical evaluation....
[...]
...In 2011, a new IASLC/ATS/ERS classification of lung adenocarcinoma proposed significant changes to the 2004 WHO classification for resected tumors including (1) discontinuing the terms bronchioloalveolar carcinoma (BAC) and mixed subtype adenocarcinoma; (2) the addition of AIS as a preinvasive lesion to join atypical adenomatous hyperplasia; (3) addition of MIA, (4) classification of invasive adenocarcinomas according to the predominant subtype after comprehensive histologic subtyping by semiquantitatively estimating the percentage of the various subtypes present in 5% increments; (5) use of the term “lepidic” for a noninvasive component (previously classified as BAC) present as part of an invasive adenocarcinoma; (6) introducing the term “invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma” for adenocarcinomas formerly classified as mucinous BAC, excluding tumors that meet criteria for AIS or MIA; (7) discontinuing the subtypes of clear cell and signet ring adenocarcinoma and recognizing these as a feature when any amount is present, however small; (8) discontinuing the term mucinous cystadenocarcinoma and including these under the category of colloid adenocarcinoma.(3,7,11,40) Subsequent to the 2011 IASLC/ATS/ERS lung adenocarcinoma classification and with the development of the 2015 WHO classification, it was decided to classify tumors formerly called large cell carcinomas that have pneumocyte marker expression (i....
[...]
University of Turin1, Aix-Marseille University2, National Health Service3, University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Foundation Trust4, University of Ljubljana5, Karolinska University Hospital6, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Grenoble7, University of Aberdeen8, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust9, VU University Medical Center10, University of Salamanca11, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven12, University Hospital of Lausanne13
TL;DR: The ESMO Guidelines Committee concluded that current state-of-the-art oncology practices in France, Belgium, and the Netherlands are suitable for frontline use and recommend further research into these practices.
2,349 citations
Cites background from "Diagnosis of Lung Cancer in Small B..."
...In those cases of NSCLC where specific subtyping is not possible by morphology alone, a limited panel of IHC is recommended to determine the subtype [39, 40]....
[...]
University of Alabama at Birmingham1, University of South Florida2, Vanderbilt University3, City of Hope National Medical Center4, Fox Chase Cancer Center5, University Of Tennessee System6, Brigham and Women's Hospital7, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance8, Case Western Reserve University9, Roswell Park Cancer Institute10, Northwestern University11, Harvard University12, University of Nebraska Medical Center13, University of Utah14, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center15
TL;DR: This manuscript focuses on the NCCN Guidelines Panel recommendations for the workup, primary treatment, risk reduction strategies, and surveillance specific to DCIS.
Abstract: Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast represents a heterogeneous group of neoplastic lesions in the breast ducts. The goal for management of DCIS is to prevent the development of invasive breast cancer. This manuscript focuses on the NCCN Guidelines Panel recommendations for the workup, primary treatment, risk reduction strategies, and surveillance specific to DCIS.
1,545 citations
TL;DR: The authors of this review discuss recent progress in diagnostic and treatment approaches, including molecular characterization to determine the likelihood of a response to targeted agents and immunotherapies.
Abstract: Smoking cessation has reduced the incidence of lung cancer. The authors of this review discuss recent progress in diagnostic and treatment approaches, including molecular characterization to determine the likelihood of a response to targeted agents and immunotherapies.
495 citations
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center1, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center2, Harvard University3, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance4, University of Michigan5, University of Pennsylvania6, Northwestern University7, Huntsman Cancer Institute8, Washington University in St. Louis9, Mayo Clinic10, University of California, San Diego11, Stanford University12, University of Wisconsin-Madison13, University of Nebraska Medical Center14, University of Colorado Boulder15, Ohio State University16, Case Western Reserve University17, University of Tennessee Health Science Center18, National Comprehensive Cancer Network19
TL;DR: The major changes to the 2012 and 2011 NCCN Guidelines for Soft Tissue Sarcoma pertain to the management of patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors and desmoid tumors.
Abstract: The NCCN Guidelines for Kidney Cancer provide multidisciplinary recommendations for the clinical management of patients with clear cell and non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma, and are intended to assist with clinical decision-making. These NCCN Guidelines Insights summarize the NCCN Kidney Cancer Panel discussions for the 2020 update to the guidelines regarding initial management and first-line systemic therapy options for patients with advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma.
459 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: Gefit inib is superior to carboplatin-paclitaxel as an initial treatment for pulmonary adenocarcinoma among nonsmokers or former light smokers in East Asia and the presence in the tumor of a mutation of the EGFR gene is a strong predictor of a better outcome with gefitinib.
Abstract: METHODS In this phase 3, open-label study, we randomly assigned previously untreated patients in East Asia who had advanced pulmonary adenocarcinoma and who were nonsmokers or former light smokers to receive gefitinib (250 mg per day) (609 patients) or carboplatin (at a dose calculated to produce an area under the curve of 5 or 6 mg per milliliter per minute) plus paclitaxel (200 mg per square meter of body-surface area) (608 patients). The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS The 12-month rates of progression-free survival were 24.9% with gefitinib and 6.7% with carboplatin–paclitaxel. The study met its primary objective of showing the noninferiority of gefitinib and also showed its superiority, as compared with carboplatin– paclitaxel, with respect to progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 0.85; P<0.001). In the subgroup of 261 patients who were positive for the epidermal growth factor receptor gene (EGFR) mutation, progression-free survival was significantly longer among those who received gefitinib than among those who received carboplatin–paclitaxel (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.64; P<0.001), whereas in the subgroup of 176 patients who were negative for the mutation, progression-free survival was significantly longer among those who received carboplatin–paclitaxel (hazard ratio for progression or death with gefitinib, 2.85; 95% CI, 2.05 to 3.98; P<0.001). The most common adverse events were rash or acne (in 66.2% of patients) and diarrhea (46.6%) in the gefitinib group and neurotoxic effects (69.9%), neutropenia (67.1%), and alopecia (58.4%) in the carboplatin–paclitaxel group. CONCLUSIONS Gefitinib is superior to carboplatin–paclitaxel as an initial treatment for pulmonary adenocarcinoma among nonsmokers or former light smokers in East Asia. The presence in the tumor of a mutation of the EGFR gene is a strong predictor of a better outcome with gefitinib. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00322452.)
7,246 citations
TL;DR: First-line gefitinib for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer who were selected on the basis of EGFR mutations improved progression-free survival, with acceptable toxicity, as compared with standard chemotherapy.
Abstract: In the planned interim analysis of data for the first 200 patients, progression-free survival was significantly longer in the gefitinib group than in the standard-chemotherapy group (hazard ratio for death or disease progression with gefitinib, 0.36; P<0.001), resulting in early termination of the study. The gefitinib group had a significantly longer median progression-free survival (10.8 months, vs. 5.4 months in the chemotherapy group; hazard ratio, 0.30; 95% confidence interval, 0.22 to 0.41; P<0.001), as well as a higher response rate (73.7% vs. 30.7%, P<0.001). The median overall survival was 30.5 months in the gefitinib group and 23.6 months in the chemotherapy group (P = 0.31). The most common adverse events in the gefitinib group were rash (71.1%) and elevated amino transferase levels (55.3%), and in the chemotherapy group, neutropenia (77.0%), anemia (64.6%), appetite loss (56.6%), and sensory neuropathy (54.9%). One patient receiving gefitinib died from interstitial lung disease. CONCLUSIONS First-line gefitinib for patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer who were selected on the basis of EGFR mutations improved progression-free survival, with acceptable toxicity, as compared with standard chemotherapy. (UMIN-CTR number, C000000376.)
4,829 citations
TL;DR: Erlotinib has been shown to improve progression-free survival compared with chemotherapy when given as first-line treatment for Asian patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with activating EGFR mutations as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: Summary Background Erlotinib has been shown to improve progression-free survival compared with chemotherapy when given as first-line treatment for Asian patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with activating EGFR mutations. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of erlotinib compared with standard chemotherapy for first-line treatment of European patients with advanced EGFR-mutation positive NSCLC. Methods We undertook the open-label, randomised phase 3 EURTAC trial at 42 hospitals in France, Italy, and Spain. Eligible participants were adults (>18 years) with NSCLC and EGFR mutations (exon 19 deletion or L858R mutation in exon 21) with no history of chemotherapy for metastatic disease (neoadjuvant or adjuvant chemotherapy ending ≥6 months before study entry was allowed). We randomly allocated participants (1:1) according to a computer-generated allocation schedule to receive oral erlotinib 150 mg per day or 3 week cycles of standard intravenous chemotherapy of cisplatin 75 mg/m 2 on day 1 plus docetaxel (75 mg/m 2 on day 1) or gemcitabine (1250 mg/m 2 on days 1 and 8). Carboplatin (AUC 6 with docetaxel 75 mg/m 2 or AUC 5 with gemcitabine 1000 mg/m 2 ) was allowed in patients unable to have cisplatin. Patients were stratified by EGFR mutation type and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0 vs 1 vs 2). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) in the intention-to-treat population. We assessed safety in all patients who received study drug (≥1 dose). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00446225. Findings Between Feb 15, 2007, and Jan 4, 2011, 174 patients with EGFR mutations were enrolled. One patient received treatment before randomisation and was thus withdrawn from the study; of the remaining patients, 86 were randomly assigned to receive erlotinib and 87 to receive standard chemotherapy. The preplanned interim analysis showed that the study met its primary endpoint; enrolment was halted, and full evaluation of the results was recommended. At data cutoff (Jan 26, 2011), median PFS was 9·7 months (95% CI 8·4-12·3) in the erlotinib group, compared with 5·2 months (4·5–5·8) in the standard chemotherapy group (hazard ratio 0·37, 95% CI 0·25–0·54; p vs none of 82 patients in the chemotherapy group), neutropenia (none vs 18 [22%]), anaemia (one [1%] vs three [4%]), and increased amino-transferase concentrations (two [2%] vs 0). Five (6%) patients on erlotinib had treatment-related severe adverse events compared with 16 patients (20%) on chemotherapy. One patient in the erlotinib group and two in the standard chemotherapy group died from treatment-related causes. Interpretation Our findings strengthen the rationale for routine baseline tissue-based assessment of EGFR mutations in patients with NSCLC and for treatment of mutation-positive patients with EGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors. Funding Spanish Lung Cancer Group, Roche Farma, Hoffmann-La Roche, and Red Tematica de Investigacion Cooperativa en Cancer.
4,791 citations
TL;DR: The inhibition of ALK in lung tumors with the ALK rearrangement resulted in tumor shrinkage or stable disease in most patients, and the drug resulted in grade 1 or 2 gastrointestinal side effects.
Abstract: Background Oncogenic fusion genes consisting of EML4 and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) are present in a subgroup of non–small-cell lung cancers, representing 2 to 7% of such tumors. We explored the therapeutic efficacy of inhibiting ALK in such tumors in an early-phase clinical trial of crizotinib (PF-02341066), an orally available small-molecule inhibitor of the ALK tyrosine kinase. Methods After screening tumor samples from approximately 1500 patients with non–small-cell lung cancer for the presence of ALK rearrangements, we identified 82 patients with advanced ALK-positive disease who were eligible for the clinical trial. Most of the patients had received previous treatment. These patients were enrolled in an expanded cohort study instituted after phase 1 dose escalation had established a recommended crizotinib dose of 250 mg twice daily in 28-day cycles. Patients were assessed for adverse events and response to therapy. Results Patients with ALK rearrangements tended to be younger than those without the rearrangements, and most of the patients had little or no exposure to tobacco and had adenocarcinomas. At a mean treatment duration of 6.4 months, the overall response rate was 57% (47 of 82 patients, with 46 confirmed partial responses and 1 confirmed complete response); 27 patients (33%) had stable disease. A total of 63 of 82 patients (77%) were continuing to receive crizotinib at the time of data cutoff, and the estimated probability of 6-month progression-free survival was 72%, with no median for the study reached. The drug resulted in grade 1 or 2 (mild) gastrointestinal side effects. Conclusions The inhibition of ALK in lung tumors with the ALK rearrangement resulted in tumor shrinkage or stable disease in most patients. (Funded by Pfizer and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00585195.)
4,091 citations
University of Utah1, University of Michigan2, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust3, Ohio State University4, Indiana University5, St. Jude Medical Center6, University of Queensland7, Beaumont Hospital8, BC Cancer Agency9, University of Rochester10, Harvard University11, American Society of Clinical Oncology12, National Institutes of Health13, Baylor College of Medicine14, Sungkyunkwan University15, University of the West of England16, Tohoku University17, Radboud University Nijmegen18, University of Toronto19, Saint Joseph Mercy Health System20, Mayo Clinic21, University of Washington22, Memorial Hospital of South Bend23, University of Texas at Austin24, Johns Hopkins University25
TL;DR: An international Expert Panel that conducted a systematic review and evaluation of the literature and developed recommendations for optimal IHC ER/PgR testing performance recommended that ER and PgR status be determined on all invasive breast cancers and breast cancer recurrences.
Abstract: Purpose To develop a guideline to improve the accuracy of immunohistochemical (IHC) estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer and the utility of these receptors as predictive markers. Methods The American Society of Clinical Oncology and the College of American Pathologists convened an international Expert Panel that conducted a systematic review and evaluation of the literature in partnership with Cancer Care Ontario and developed recommendations for optimal IHC ER/PgR testing performance. Results Up to 20% of current IHC determinations of ER and PgR testing worldwide may be inaccurate (false negative or false positive). Most of the issues with testing have occurred because of variation in preanalytic variables, thresholds for positivity, and interpretation criteria. Recommendations The Panel recommends that ER and PgR status be determined on all invasive breast cancers and breast cancer recurrences. A testing algorithm that relies on accurate, reproducible assay performance is proposed. Elements to reliably reduce assay variation are specified. It is recommended that ER and PgR assays be considered positive if there are at least 1% positive tumor nuclei in the sample on testing in the presence of expected reactivity of internal (normal epithelial elements) and external controls. The absence of benefit from endocrine therapy for women with ER-negative invasive breast cancers has been confirmed in large overviews of randomized clinical trials.
3,902 citations