INTRODUCTION: Large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the lung and SCLC are collectively classified as high-grade NECs. However, there have been few reports focusing on the differences of clinicopathological prognostic factors between resectable LCNEC and SCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed the clinical data of 140 patients who underwent complete resection of high grade NEC in our institute and analyzed the clinicopathological features in relation to their survival. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in overall and recurrence-free survival between pure and combined subtypes in either LCNEC or SCLC. In LCNEC, larger tumor diameter (P = .01), nodal metastasis (P < .01), lymphatic permeation (P < .01), and vascular invasion (P = .01) were unfavorable prognostic factors. However, in SCLC, tumor diameter and vascular invasion were not prognostic factors, but nodal metastasis (P < .01) and lymphatic permeation (P = .03) were strongly correlated with poor prognosis. CONCLUSION: There were no apparent differences in biological behavior between pure and combined subtypes in either LCNEC or SCLC. Lymphatic involvement was an important unfavorable prognostic factor in SCLC, whereas tumor diameter, vascular invasion, and lymphatic involvement had a poor prognostic effect in LCNEC.
INTRODUCTION: Large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the lung and SCLC are collectively classified as high-grade NECs. However, there have been few reports focusing on the differences of clinicopathological prognostic factors between resectable LCNEC and SCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We reviewed the clinical data of 140 patients who underwent complete resection of high grade NEC in our institute and analyzed the clinicopathological features in relation to their survival. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in overall and recurrence-free survival between pure and combined subtypes in either LCNEC or SCLC. In LCNEC, larger tumor diameter (P = .01), nodal metastasis (P < .01), lymphatic permeation (P < .01), and vascular invasion (P = .01) were unfavorable prognostic factors. However, in SCLC, tumor diameter and vascular invasion were not prognostic factors, but nodal metastasis (P < .01) and lymphatic permeation (P = .03) were strongly correlated with poor prognosis. CONCLUSION: There were no apparent differences in biological behavior between pure and combined subtypes in either LCNEC or SCLC. Lymphatic involvement was an important unfavorable prognostic factor in SCLC, whereas tumor diameter, vascular invasion, and lymphatic involvement had a poor prognostic effect in LCNEC.
Authors: Juliane Rieber; Julian Schmitt; Arne Warth; Thomas Muley; Jutta Kappes; Florian Eichhorn; Hans Hoffmann; Claus Peter Heussel; Thomas Welzel; Jürgen Debus; Michael Thomas; Martin Steins; Stefan Rieken Journal: Eur J Med Res Date: 2015-08-14 Impact factor: 2.175
Authors: Barbara Brominska; Piotr Gabryel; Donata Jarmołowska-Jurczyszyn; Małgorzata Janicka-Jedyńska; Andrzej Kluk; Maciej Trojanowski; Beata Brajer-Luftmann; Kosma Woliński; Rafał Czepczyński; Paweł Gut; Gabriel Bromiński; Przemysław Majewski; Wojciech Dyszkiewicz; Marek Ruchała Journal: Arch Med Sci Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 3.318
Authors: Elizabeth Dudnik; Samuel Kareff; Mor Moskovitz; Chul Kim; Stephen V Liu; Anastasiya Lobachov; Teodor Gottfried; Damien Urban; Alona Zer; Ofer Rotem; Amir Onn; Mira Wollner; Jair Bar Journal: J Immunother Cancer Date: 2021-02 Impact factor: 13.751
Authors: Anna Lowczak; Agnieszka Kolasinska-Cwikla; Jarosław B Ćwikła; Karolina Osowiecka; Jakub Palucki; Robert Rzepko; Lidka Glinka; Anna Doboszyńska Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2020-05-07 Impact factor: 4.241