Literature DB >> 22990278

'Bronchioloalveolar carcinoma': is the term really dead? A critical review of a new classification system for pulmonary adenocarcinomas.

Lauren Xu1, Fabio Tavora, Allen Burke.   

Abstract

'Bronchioloalveolar carcinoma' (BAC) is a designation that has been in use for over 50 years. Recently, the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, in association with the American Thoracic Society and the European Respiratory Society (IASLC/ATS/ERS) has recommended dropping the term altogether. It is argued that 'BAC' has no clear conceptual meaning, has been used in conjunction with invasive tumours of various types, and was applied to mucinous and non-mucinous tumours that are pathogenetically distinct. In addition to replacing 'BAC' with the standard pathological 'adenocarcinoma in situ', the IASLC/ATS/ERS panel also attempted to tackle the more substantial problem of standardising the terminology of lung adenocarcinomas that are not clearly invasive. By identifying 'minimally invasive adenocarcinomas' with <5 mm invasion, the IASLC/ATS/ERS has attempted to classify invasive tumours with little metastatic potential. Problems remaining with the new classification include use of the term 'lepidic predominant adenocarcinoma' (LPA), which replaces BAC with invasive components, and lack of clarity regarding what constitutes true invasion in well-differentiated lung adenocarcinomas. Specifically, the distinction between acinar growth pattern and in situ growth is not standardised. The basis for the new classification, as well as the plethora of previous attempts at classifying lung adenocarcinomas that are neither clearly invasive nor clearly in situ, are reviewed. Time will determine if the use of a 5 mm limit is workable or if the term 'LPA' has traction.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22990278     DOI: 10.1097/PAT.0b013e3283579fda

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pathology        ISSN: 0031-3025            Impact factor:   5.306


  3 in total

Review 1.  The lung adenocarcinoma guidelines: what to be considered by surgeons.

Authors:  Rodrigo A S Sardenberg; Evandro Sobroza Mello; Riad N Younes
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 2.895

2.  Pathologic and gene expression comparison of CT- screen detected and routinely detected stage I/0 lung adenocarcinoma in NCCN risk-matched cohorts.

Authors:  Eric J Burks; Jiarui Zhang; Travis B Sullivan; Xingyi Shi; Jacob M Sands; Shawn M Regis; Brady J McKee; Andrea B McKee; Sherry Zhang; Hanqiao Liu; Gang Liu; Avrum Spira; Jennifer Beane; Marc E Lenburg; Kimberly M Rieger-Christ
Journal:  Cancer Treat Res Commun       Date:  2021-11-10

Review 3.  The new 2011 international association for the study of lung cancer/american thoracic society/european respiratory society classification of lung adenocarcinoma in resected specimens: clinicopathologic relevance and emerging issues.

Authors:  Seung Yeon Ha; Mee Sook Roh
Journal:  Korean J Pathol       Date:  2013-08-26
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.