Ye Xu1, Chen Zhu1, Wenliang Qian1, Min Zheng2. 1. Department of Thoracic Surgery, Tongren Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 1111XianXia Road, Shanghai, 200336, China. 2. Department of Thoracic Surgery, Tongren Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 1111XianXia Road, Shanghai, 200336, China. shtrzm@126.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Although many studies have explored clinicopathologic characteristics and prognosis of lung adenocarcinoma, a few literatures reported the mutational status of lung adenocarcinomas with lepidic pattern and whether there is difference between adenocarcinomas with pure lepidic component and lepidic predominant adenocarcinomas remain unknown. METHODS: One hundred and thirty-three patients including 92 adenocarcinomas with pure lepidic component and 41 lepidic predominant adenocarcinomas were subjected to the study. All the clinicopathologic data, the follow-up information and the status of gene mutations including EGFR, KRAS, HER2, BRAF, AKT1, ALK, RET and ROS1 were investigated. RESULTS: Of the 133 lung adenocarcinomas with lepidic pattern, 87.22 % (116/133) were detected harboring mutations in our tested genes, among which 90.52 % (105/116) harbored EGFR mutation. There are three KRAS mutations and two BRAF mutations in our cohort, and we revealed two ALK fusion and one RET fusion. No ROS1 fusion was discovered. There was no significant difference in gene mutations between adenocarcinomas with pure lepidic component and lepidic predominant adenocarcinomas except EGFR mutation (p = 0.039). Lepidic predominant adenocarcinomas seemed to have more EGFR mutation. The post-recurrence survival was significantly prolonged in patients who received TKIs. CONCLUSIONS: Adenocarcinoma with lepidic pattern is a low-grade lung tumor with favorable prognosis and displays frequent EGFR mutation. Compared with lepidic predominant adenocarcinomas, lung adenocarcinomas with pure lepidic component have a better prognosis. On the basis of these results, we also suggested the application of EGFR-TKIs therapy for EGFR mutation-positive patients after recurrence could achieve prolonged survival.
PURPOSE: Although many studies have explored clinicopathologic characteristics and prognosis of lung adenocarcinoma, a few literatures reported the mutational status of lung adenocarcinomas with lepidic pattern and whether there is difference between adenocarcinomas with pure lepidic component and lepidic predominant adenocarcinomas remain unknown. METHODS: One hundred and thirty-three patients including 92 adenocarcinomas with pure lepidic component and 41 lepidic predominant adenocarcinomas were subjected to the study. All the clinicopathologic data, the follow-up information and the status of gene mutations including EGFR, KRAS, HER2, BRAF, AKT1, ALK, RET and ROS1 were investigated. RESULTS: Of the 133 lung adenocarcinomas with lepidic pattern, 87.22 % (116/133) were detected harboring mutations in our tested genes, among which 90.52 % (105/116) harbored EGFR mutation. There are three KRAS mutations and two BRAF mutations in our cohort, and we revealed two ALK fusion and one RET fusion. No ROS1 fusion was discovered. There was no significant difference in gene mutations between adenocarcinomas with pure lepidic component and lepidic predominant adenocarcinomas except EGFR mutation (p = 0.039). Lepidic predominant adenocarcinomas seemed to have more EGFR mutation. The post-recurrence survival was significantly prolonged in patients who received TKIs. CONCLUSIONS:Adenocarcinoma with lepidic pattern is a low-grade lung tumor with favorable prognosis and displays frequent EGFR mutation. Compared with lepidic predominant adenocarcinomas, lung adenocarcinomas with pure lepidic component have a better prognosis. On the basis of these results, we also suggested the application of EGFR-TKIs therapy for EGFR mutation-positive patients after recurrence could achieve prolonged survival.
Entities:
Keywords:
Adenocarcinoma with lepidic pattern; Adenocarcinoma with pure lepidic component; Lepidic predominant adenocarcinoma; Mutations; Prognosis
Authors: William D Travis; Elisabeth Brambilla; Andrew G Nicholson; Yasushi Yatabe; John H M Austin; Mary Beth Beasley; Lucian R Chirieac; Sanja Dacic; Edwina Duhig; Douglas B Flieder; Kim Geisinger; Fred R Hirsch; Yuichi Ishikawa; Keith M Kerr; Masayuki Noguchi; Giuseppe Pelosi; Charles A Powell; Ming Sound Tsao; Ignacio Wistuba Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Joon Yim; Lee-Ching Zhu; Luis Chiriboga; Heather N Watson; Judith D Goldberg; Andre L Moreira Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2006-12-22 Impact factor: 7.842
Authors: Arne Warth; Thomas Muley; Michael Meister; Albrecht Stenzinger; Michael Thomas; Peter Schirmacher; Philipp A Schnabel; Jan Budczies; Hans Hoffmann; Wilko Weichert Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-03-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Alain C Borczuk; Fang Qian; Angeliki Kazeros; Jennifer Eleazar; Adel Assaad; Joshua R Sonett; Mark Ginsburg; Lyall Gorenstein; Charles A Powell Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2009-03 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: M Noguchi; A Morikawa; M Kawasaki; Y Matsuno; T Yamada; S Hirohashi; H Kondo; Y Shimosato Journal: Cancer Date: 1995-06-15 Impact factor: 6.860