[Effects of sampling methods on evaluating post-treatment pathological response in resected non-small cell lung cancer specimens with diameter greater than 3 cm].

Q3 Medicine
H F Liu, Y Huang, J H Guo, S L Li, J L Lin, S N Zhao, X F Xie, R Y Wang, J Kong, J J Li, L K Hou, C Y Wu
{"title":"[Effects of sampling methods on evaluating post-treatment pathological response in resected non-small cell lung cancer specimens with diameter greater than 3 cm].","authors":"H F Liu, Y Huang, J H Guo, S L Li, J L Lin, S N Zhao, X F Xie, R Y Wang, J Kong, J J Li, L K Hou, C Y Wu","doi":"10.3760/cma.j.cn112151-20240816-00526","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> To investigate the effects of sampling methods on pathological assessment of resected non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) specimen with tumor maximum diameter >3 cm after neoadjuvant therapy. <b>Methods:</b> NSCLC patients with a large tumor (diameter >3 cm) that were resected after neoadjuvant therapy from June 2020 to July 2023 were retrospectively collected in the Department of Pathology, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Shanghai, China. Sampling methods of the tumor bed were performed in accordance with the international and Chinese experts recommendations for resection specimens following neoadjuvant therapy (recommended sampling method, RSM), and all remaining tumor bed lesions were completely sampled after recommended sampling (complete sampling method, CSM). The difference of pathological response assessment of residual viable tumor (RVT) between RSM and CSM was examined. <b>Results:</b> A total of 90 cases were identified and analyzed, including 39 cases of squamous cell carcinoma and 51 cases of adenocarcinoma, treated with neoadjuvant therapy including chemotherapy in 22 cases (24.4%), targeted therapy in 14 cases (15.6%), and chemoimmunotherapy in 54 cases (60.0%). There were 62 males and 28 females with an average age of (62.7±17.9) years. The average tumor maximum diameter was 4.3 cm (range, 3.1-8.0 cm). The average number of sampled blocks was 8 blocks (range, 5 to 16) and 15 blocks (range, 8 to 36) per case by RSM and CSM, respectively. According to the definition of major pathological response (MPR) in which RVT is ≤10%, the numbers of patients with MPR were 34 cases by RSM and 30 cases by CSM, respectively. Four cases showed inconsistent RVT between the two methods, including one case of squamous cell carcinoma and three cases of adenocarcinoma. The RVT of the four inconsistent cases was 7%, 7%, 5% and 9% (MPR by RSM), and 15%, 15%, 15% and 20% (non-MPR by CSM), respectively. The kappa values of MPR consistency evaluated by the two sampling methods were 0.893 for all cases, 0.906 for squamous cell carcinoma cases and 0.751 for adenocarcinoma cases. According to MPR cut-off of 65% for invasive primary adenocarcinoma, 24 cases and 20 cases achieved MPR by RSM and CSM, respectively. Of the four inconsistent cases, the RVT by RSM was 60% in three cases and 65% in one case (MPR), whereas the RVT by CSM was 70% in three cases and 75% in one case (non-MPR). The kappa value of the two sampling methods was 0.741. <b>Conclusions:</b> There is high consistency between RSM and CSM in the pathological assessment of post-treatment responses in resected NSCLC specimens with tumor maximum diameter larger than 3 cm. When the percentage of RVT cells is close to MPR, re-evaluation of the specimen is required and CSM may be necessary to accurately evaluate the degree of pathological remission, assist in clinical postoperative treatment, and predict patient prognosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":35997,"journal":{"name":"中华病理学杂志","volume":"54 5","pages":"463-469"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中华病理学杂志","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn112151-20240816-00526","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the effects of sampling methods on pathological assessment of resected non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) specimen with tumor maximum diameter >3 cm after neoadjuvant therapy. Methods: NSCLC patients with a large tumor (diameter >3 cm) that were resected after neoadjuvant therapy from June 2020 to July 2023 were retrospectively collected in the Department of Pathology, Shanghai Pulmonary Hospital, Shanghai, China. Sampling methods of the tumor bed were performed in accordance with the international and Chinese experts recommendations for resection specimens following neoadjuvant therapy (recommended sampling method, RSM), and all remaining tumor bed lesions were completely sampled after recommended sampling (complete sampling method, CSM). The difference of pathological response assessment of residual viable tumor (RVT) between RSM and CSM was examined. Results: A total of 90 cases were identified and analyzed, including 39 cases of squamous cell carcinoma and 51 cases of adenocarcinoma, treated with neoadjuvant therapy including chemotherapy in 22 cases (24.4%), targeted therapy in 14 cases (15.6%), and chemoimmunotherapy in 54 cases (60.0%). There were 62 males and 28 females with an average age of (62.7±17.9) years. The average tumor maximum diameter was 4.3 cm (range, 3.1-8.0 cm). The average number of sampled blocks was 8 blocks (range, 5 to 16) and 15 blocks (range, 8 to 36) per case by RSM and CSM, respectively. According to the definition of major pathological response (MPR) in which RVT is ≤10%, the numbers of patients with MPR were 34 cases by RSM and 30 cases by CSM, respectively. Four cases showed inconsistent RVT between the two methods, including one case of squamous cell carcinoma and three cases of adenocarcinoma. The RVT of the four inconsistent cases was 7%, 7%, 5% and 9% (MPR by RSM), and 15%, 15%, 15% and 20% (non-MPR by CSM), respectively. The kappa values of MPR consistency evaluated by the two sampling methods were 0.893 for all cases, 0.906 for squamous cell carcinoma cases and 0.751 for adenocarcinoma cases. According to MPR cut-off of 65% for invasive primary adenocarcinoma, 24 cases and 20 cases achieved MPR by RSM and CSM, respectively. Of the four inconsistent cases, the RVT by RSM was 60% in three cases and 65% in one case (MPR), whereas the RVT by CSM was 70% in three cases and 75% in one case (non-MPR). The kappa value of the two sampling methods was 0.741. Conclusions: There is high consistency between RSM and CSM in the pathological assessment of post-treatment responses in resected NSCLC specimens with tumor maximum diameter larger than 3 cm. When the percentage of RVT cells is close to MPR, re-evaluation of the specimen is required and CSM may be necessary to accurately evaluate the degree of pathological remission, assist in clinical postoperative treatment, and predict patient prognosis.

[取样方法对直径大于3cm的非小细胞肺癌切除标本治疗后病理反应评价的影响]。
目的:探讨采样方法对肿瘤最大直径为bb0 ~ 3cm的非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)切除标本新辅助治疗后病理评价的影响。方法:回顾性收集2020年6月~ 2023年7月上海肺科医院病毒科收治的经新辅助治疗后切除的大肿瘤(直径> ~ 3cm)非小细胞肺癌患者。肿瘤床的采样方法按照国际和中国专家对新辅助治疗后切除标本的推荐方法(推荐采样法,RSM)进行,所有剩余的肿瘤床病变按照推荐采样法(完全采样法,CSM)进行完全采样。观察RSM与CSM在残余活瘤(RVT)病理反应评价上的差异。结果:共鉴定分析90例,其中鳞状细胞癌39例,腺癌51例,接受新辅助治疗,其中化疗22例(24.4%),靶向治疗14例(15.6%),化疗免疫治疗54例(60.0%)。男性62例,女性28例,平均年龄(62.7±17.9)岁。肿瘤平均最大直径4.3 cm(范围3.1 ~ 8.0 cm)。RSM和CSM的平均采样区块数量分别为8个区块(范围5到16)和15个区块(范围8到36)。根据RVT≤10%的主要病理反应(MPR)定义,RSM组发生MPR 34例,CSM组发生MPR 30例。两种方法RVT不一致的有4例,其中鳞状细胞癌1例,腺癌3例。4例不一致病例的RVT分别为7%、7%、5%和9% (RSM为MPR)和15%、15%、15%和20% (CSM为非MPR)。两种抽样方法评价的MPR一致性kappa值均为0.893,鳞状细胞癌为0.906,腺癌为0.751。浸润性原发性腺癌的MPR截止值为65%,RSM和CSM分别有24例和20例达到MPR。在4例不一致的病例中,RSM的RVT为3例60%,1例65% (MPR),而CSM的RVT为3例70%,1例75%(非MPR)。两种抽样方法的kappa值为0.741。结论:在肿瘤最大直径大于3cm的非小细胞肺癌切除标本中,RSM与CSM对术后反应的病理评价具有较高的一致性。当RVT细胞百分比接近MPR时,需要重新评估标本,可能需要CSM来准确评估病理缓解程度,协助临床术后治疗,预测患者预后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
中华病理学杂志
中华病理学杂志 Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10377
期刊介绍:
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信