Early stage lung cancer: pathologist’s perspective
Editorial on Early Stage Lung Cancer: Sublobar Resections are a Choice?

Early stage lung cancer: pathologist’s perspective

Francesca Boggio1, Alessandro Del Gobbo1, Giorgio Croci1,2, Marco Barella1, Stefano Ferrero1,3

1Division of Pathology, Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy; 2Department of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, 3Department of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy

Correspondence to: Francesca Boggio. Fondazione IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Via Francesco Sforza 28, 20122 Milan, Italy. Email: francesca.boggio@hotmail.it.

Provenance and Peer Review: This article was commissioned by the Guest Editors (Mario Nosotti, Ilaria Righi and Lorenzo Rosso) for the series “Early Stage Lung Cancer: Sublobar Resections are a Choice?” published in Journal of Thoracic Disease. The article did not undergo external peer review.


Submitted Sep 10, 2019. Accepted for publication Nov 29, 2019.

doi: 10.21037/jtd.2019.12.30


Presurgical diagnosis

Albeit considered less relevant in comparison to stage IV cancer, obtaining a cytological presurgical diagnosis of early lesion is strongly recommended whenever feasible (1).

The most common procedure used in clinical practice are represented by bronchoscopy, endobronchial ultrasound and CT-guided biopsy.

Those techniques demonstrated, in the recent years, satisfying rate of diagnostic adequacy and to provide enough material also for molecular testing (2-4).

When dealing with small (<1 or 1.5 cm) lesions several authors advise that performing CT-guided fine-needle aspiration can produce high diagnostic reliability rates (5-8).

Considered the increasing incidence of lung cancer diagnosed at early stage, the pathologist should be aware of the essential information’s he is asked to provide for the correct management of the patient.

Prior to the 2000s, lung cancer was classified into the following two major groups: small cell lung carcinoma (SCLC) and non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) (encompassing squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma (ADC), large cell lung carcinoma and sarcomatoid carcinoma).

Nowadays the new WHO classification of lung tumors (9) no longer supports this strategy, stressing the use of the specific terminology of ADC and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) (versus SCLC) as much as possible.

The use the nomenclature “non-small cell lung carcinoma not otherwise specified” (NSCLC-NOS) should be saved for selected cases when a more precise diagnosis is not achievable considering both cytomorphology and immunohistochemistry.

Morphology

Morphological clues of glandular differentiation in ADC are expressed cytologically in different features: papillae with central fibrovascular cores, pseudopapillae, group of cells organized in flat sheets or three-dimensional structures, clusters with acinar structures with picket fence or honeycomb-like arrangement (10-13).

Cytologically cytoplasms in ADC usually are basophilic with homogeneous, granular or foamy appearance. Frequently cytoplasmic vacuoles can also be spotted.

Nuclei are usually eccentrically located with delicately granular, hyperchromatic or uniform chromatin arrangement. Macronucleoli represent a common finding.

On the other hand, squamous differentiation must be suspected with evidence of keratinization, pearls and intercellular bridges.

Cells usually show opaque or dense cytoplasm, less translucent compared to other NSCLC hystotypes. Cellular contours generally have rounded, ovoid or streched shape and nuclei are usually central, hyperchromatic, with rectangular outlines and squared-off edges.

Not infrequently chromatin is pyknotic meanwhile nucleoli are usually non-evident (10-13).

Unfortunately, morphology alone is frequently not a straightforward tool for a specific cytological differentiation, in this contest immunohistochemistry play the major role in distinguishing ADC versus SCC.

Immunohistochemistry

Limited immunohistochemical panel are strongly suggested in order to spare as much material as possible for subsequent molecular analysis (14-16).

Several authors suggest to start the initial evaluation with TTF-1 and p40 antibodies, considered the most specific markers for ADC and SCC, respectively (13,17,18).

Specific stain for mucin (such as diastase–periodic acid-Schiff, mucicarmine, or Alcian blue) may also be useful to confirm the glandular nature of suspected ADC together with the expression of napsin A.

Other markers for squamous differentiation, namely cytokeratin 5/6, cytokeratin 7, 34βE12, and S100A7, can also be useful albeit qualified by less sensitivity and specificity (13).

In the commonly used diagnostic algorithm positive cases for TTF-1 and/or mucin with a negative p40 expression should be categorized as ADC, and those that are positive for a p40 and negative ADC marker should be defined as SCC.

Albeit TTF-1 and p40 are considered mutually exclusive exceptions can occur since some ADC could express squamous marker. In those cases, if tumor cells express TTF-1 the diagnosis should be NSCLC, favor ADC regardless of any positivity for squamous marker.

Moreover, if those markers are express differently in 2 morphological separate populations of cell the pathologist should be awarded that this could represent an adenosquamous carcinoma, despite this diagnosis can only be performed on resected sample (13).

When those markers are equally negative and when there is no clear-cut morphological evidence of squamous or glandular differentiations, further stains should be performed in order to confirm the epithelial nature of the lesion (such as pan cytokeratin markers), or to exclude other epithelioid tumors (melanoma, lymphoma, malignant mesothelioma, epithelioid hemangioendothelioma or metastasis).

Diagnostic challenges

Diagnostic error on cytology is estimated to occur in 15% of patient with lung cancer (19).

Reactive atypia basically represent the main source of false positive on this sample: inflammatory lesion, especially granulomatous inflammation, could sometimes elicit striking epithelial atypia resulting in incorrect over-diagnosis (20).

On the other hand, common reason for false negative results are represented by sampling error, particularly for small lesions. In this setting on-site evaluation of the sample by pathologist could minimize this problem (21).

Finally specimen from low-grade ADC cells, particularly those from ADC in situ, may be wrongly identified as histiocytes (22).

To date the IASLC/ATS/ERS histological subtyping applied on resected specimen for lung ADC (namely acinar, solid, lepidic, papillary, and micropapillary) (23), is not currently employed for cytological specimens.

Some Authors tried to classify those lesions also on cytological material but the majority of these articles failed in this attempt, also due to the mixed histotype frequently observed on the subsequent resected specimen (24-27).

More data are needed before grading on small biopsies and cytology can be formally recommended.


Diagnosis on surgical specimens

Early lung cancer potentially amenable to sublobar resection correspond radiologically to ground-glass opacification (GGO).

Since it has been demonstrated how this radiological finding usually correspond to early form of ADC (28), we will focus on this particular histotype in the following section.

ADC represent the most common histotype in NSCLC characterized by high clinical and microscopical heterogeneity.

During the last decades, several efforts have been made in order to create a reliable prognostic subtyping.

Those studies culminate in 2011 with a comprehensive update of the histologic classification included in the 2015 World Health Organization (WHO) classification (9).

The new classification confers different prognostic meaning to the five invasive subtypes. The best prognosis was assigned to lepidic predominant tumors while the poorest was allocate to solid and micropapillary predominant tumors.

Lesion exhibiting papillary and acinar predominant architecture were designated as tumors having an intermediate prognosis. Several subsequent studies confirmed this evidence (29-32).

In this classification, tumors entirely composed by the so-called lepidic pattern of growth (consisting in neoplastic cells expanding along the alveolar structures) were labeled as adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) thus replacing the nomenclature of bronchioloalveolar carcinoma.

Moreover the new terminology of minimally invasive adenocarcinoma (MIA) was also proposed (9).

According to this new classification, lesions radiologically presenting as GGO on CT are to date considered to indicate a tumor composed essentially by lepidic component, suggestive therefore for AIS or MIA.

In detail AIS is defined as a localized small (≤3 cm) ADC with exclusive lepidic growth, lacking stromal, vascular, alveolar space or pleural invasion. Those ADC should be staged as pT1a and an extensive sampling is strongly recommended in order to avoid under-staging risks by missing any invasive component (33) due to the heterogeneity of these tumors (34).

However, this diagnosis is not free from diagnostic challenges since it should be discriminated from the atypical adenomatous hyperplasia (AAH), considered a premalignant lesion. This distinction can be difficult and pathologists should remember that even if AAH is usually smaller than 0.5 cm, larger lesions can also occur and, at the same time, that AIS can be smaller than 0.5 cm.

Tips for histological differential diagnosis should be searched once more morphologically: AIS typically is composed by more packed homogeneous cuboidal or columnar cells with more abrupt transition to adjacent alveolar lining cells (33).

The WHO criteria for MIA allow to defines as such solitary lesions smaller than 3 cm, with a predominantly lepidic pattern and ≤5 mm of invasion, without lymphatic or blood vessels invasion, pleural involvement, necrosis or spread through alveolar spaces (9).

The evaluation of the invasion foci could be difficult particularly if multiple foci are spotted in the same tumor. In this contest, recent data suggest to sum the percentage area of the invasive components and multiply the result for the main tumor diameter. If the result is ≤5 mm then the diagnosis of MIA should be formulated (35). Those tumors are to date classified as T1mi.

In a minority of cases GGO correspond histologically to invasive carcinoma, more frequently with lepidic, acinar or papillary pattern (36).

For those tumors, the main dimension represents one of the crucial predictors of outcome, causing it to be one of the most important elements of TNM staging.

Even if more evidences are still needed to confirm that, it is recommended to evaluate only the invasive component to assess the TNM staging, irrespective of the size and extent of the lepidic area (33).

The pathological precise discrimination between lepidic and invasive components is still a matter of challenging. On the other hand, the new classification demonstrated to have high reproducibly among pathologists, supporting the adoption of the “predominant pattern” strategy for subtyping invasive ADC (37).

Tumor spread through air spaces

Tumor spread through air spaces (STAS) was portrait as tumor cells present within air spaces of the parenchyma outside the tumor border. This phenomenon may occur morphologically with micropapillary structures (small papillary structures without fibro-vascular stalk), solid nests of tumor cells or even scattered discohesive single cells (38).

This evidence is now identified as a pattern of invasion in lung ADC particularly tricky since not visible on gross examination and without radiological method of detection.

Moreover, STAS is mostly overlooked on microscopic review also for the difficulties in its differentiation from alveolar macrophages.

To avoid misinterpretations pathologist should look for pigmented or foamy cytoplasms and for small regular uniform nuclei without atypia, peculiar for histiocyte.

The distinction of STAS from artifacts is also a demanding task: presence of cells in clusters often casually scattered over tissue or at the border of the tissue section, clusters with jagged edges, linear strips of cells lifted off of alveolar walls all represent feature favoring artifact rather than STAT (38).

Despite interpretation difficulties, detection of this pattern of invasion is particularly important for early stage lung carcinoma since it has been associated with higher incidence of loco-regional recurrence in patient treated with sub-lobar resection and also represent an independent prognostic factor for both recurrence-free survival and overall survival (39,40).

Pleural invasion

Pleural invasion remains to be an important prognostic factor for NSCLC able to reduce, when present, the survival rates.

Previous studies have shown that patients with visceral pleural invasion (VPI) yield significantly worse survival rates than patients without, therefore according to 8th edition of the TNM classification for NSCLC its presence increases the T descriptor from T1 to T2 and upstages a tumour from stage IA to stage IB, even if smaller than 3 cm in size (41).

Also in early stage lung cancer, the prognostic relevance of this feature has been demonstrated (42,43) although not predictable by radiographic study and usually reported in low rate of patients (44).

Nevertheless, one study assessed the meaning of VPI in patient who underwent a sublobar resection (45) stating how completion lobectomy seem unnecessary for patient with VPI.

To date a careful examination of the visceral pleura is always suggest in order to collect all the prognostic information and formulate a thorough pathological report.

Molecular analysis

Since large trial showed no benefit using adjuvant targeted therapies in early stage lung cancer, molecular analysis is usually not required on these specimens.

Adjuvant immunotherapy trials employing anti-PD-1 and anti PD-L1 checkpoint inhibitors in stage I to III adjuvant setting are ongoing (1,46).

Recently several studies have explored prognostic prediction models by using molecular biomarkers from single omics data, in order to identify patients with heterogeneous prognoses.

Aim of these studies is to better stratify patients in order to select who may benefit from adjuvant therapy, nowadays proposed only to patients with resected stage IB disease and a primary tumor >4 cm (47-49).

To date large-scale, multicenter and prospective studies are still necessary to validate those promising models.


Acknowledgments

Funding: None.


Footnote

Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jtd.2019.12.30). The series “Early Stage Lung Cancer: Sublobar Resections are a Choice?” was commissioned by the editorial office without any funding or sponsorship. The authors have no other conflicts of interest to declare.

Ethical Statement: The authors are accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.


References

  1. Postmus PE, Kerr KM, Oudkerk M, et al. Early and locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2017;28:iv1-21. [Crossref]
  2. Navani N, Brown JM, Nankivell M, et al. Suitability of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration specimens for subtyping and genotyping of non-small cell lung cancer: a multicenter study of 774 patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2012;185:1316-22. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  3. Esterbrook G, Anathhanam S, Plant PK. Adequacy of endobronchial ultrasound transbronchial needle aspiration samples in the subtyping of non-small cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 2013;80:30-4. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  4. Rodriguez EF, Pastorello R, Osmani L, et al. Ultrasound-Guided Transthoracic Fine-Needle Aspiration: A Reliable Tool in Diagnosis and Molecular Profiling of Lung Masses. Acta Cytol 2020;64:208-15. [PubMed]
  5. Wallace MJ, Krishnamurthy S, Broemeling LD, et al. CT-guided percutaneous fine-needle aspiration biopsy of small (< or =1-cm) pulmonary lesions. Radiology 2002;225:823-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  6. Tosi D, Mendogni P, Carrinola R, et al. CT-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy of solitary pulmonary nodules under 15 mm in diameter: time for an afterthought? J Thorac Dis 2019;11:724-31. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  7. Ng YL, Patsios D, Roberts H, et al. CT-guided percutaneous fine-needle aspiration biopsy of pulmonary nodules measuring 10 mm or less. Clin Radiol 2008;63:272-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  8. Kothary N, Lock L, Sze DY, et al. Computed tomography-guided percutaneous needle biopsy of pulmonary nodules: impact of nodule size on diagnostic accuracy. Clin Lung Cancer 2009;10:360-3. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  9. Travis WD, Brambilla E, Burke A, et al. WHO classification of tumours of the lung, pleura, thymus and heart. International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2015.
  10. Johnston WW, Frable WJ. The cytopathology of the respiratory tract. A review. Am J Pathol 1976;84:372-424. [PubMed]
  11. Geisinger KR. Modern cytopathology. Gulf Professional Publishing; 2004.
  12. Rekhtman N, Brandt SM, Sigel CS, et al. Suitability of thoracic cytology for new therapeutic paradigms in non-small cell lung carcinoma: high accuracy of tumor subtyping and feasibility of EGFR and KRAS molecular testing. J Thorac Oncol 2011;6:451-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  13. Travis WD, Brambilla E, Noguchi M, et al. 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. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2013;137:668-84. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  14. Travis WD, Rekhtman N. Pathological diagnosis and classification of lung cancer in small biopsies and cytology: strategic management of tissue for molecular testing. Semin Respir Crit Care Med 2011;32:22-31. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  15. Rossi G, Papotti M, Barbareschi M, et al. Morphology and a limited number of immunohistochemical markers may efficiently subtype non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:e141-2; author reply e143-4.
  16. Rekhtman N, Ang DC, Sima CS, et al. Immunohistochemical algorithm for differentiation of lung adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma based on large series of whole-tissue sections with validation in small specimens. Mod Pathol 2011;24:1348-59. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  17. Bishop JA, Teruya-Feldstein J, Westra WH, et al. p40 (DeltaNp63) is superior to p63 for the diagnosis of pulmonary squamous cell carcinoma. Mod Pathol 2012;25:405-15. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  18. Pelosi G, Fabbri A, Bianchi F, et al. DeltaNp63 (p40) and thyroid transcription factor-1 immunoreactivity on small biopsies or cellblocks for typing non-small cell lung cancer: a novel two-hit, sparing-material approach. J Thorac Oncol 2012;7:281-90. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  19. Raab SS, Meier FA, Zarbo RJ, et al. The "Big Dog" effect: variability assessing the causes of error in diagnoses of patients with lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:2808-14. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  20. Auger M, Moriarty AT, Laucirica R, et al. Granulomatous inflammation-an underestimated cause of false-positive diagnoses in lung fine-needle aspirates: observations from the college of american pathologists nongynecologic cytopathology interlaboratory comparison program. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2010;134:1793-6. [PubMed]
  21. Burlingame OO, Kesse KO, Silverman SG, et al. On-site adequacy evaluations performed by cytotechnologists: correlation with final interpretations of 5241 image-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsies. Cancer Cytopathol 2012;120:177-84. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  22. Idowu MO, Powers CN. Lung cancer cytology: potential pitfalls and mimics - a review. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 2010;3:367-85. [PubMed]
  23. Travis WD, Brambilla E, Noguchi M, et al. International association for the study of lung cancer/american thoracic society/european respiratory society international multidisciplinary classification of lung adenocarcinoma. J Thorac Oncol 2011;6:244-85. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  24. Rodriguez EF, Dacic S, Pantanowitz L, et al. Cytopathology of pulmonary adenocarcinoma with a single histological pattern using the proposed International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer/American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society (IASLC/ATS/ERS) classification. Cancer Cytopathol 2015;123:306-17. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  25. Rodriguez EF, Monaco SE, Dacic S. Cytologic subtyping of lung adenocarcinoma by using the proposed International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer/American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society (IASLC/ATS/ERS) adenocarcinoma classification. Cancer Cytopathol 2013;121:629-37. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  26. Rudomina DE, Lin O, Moreira AL. Cytologic diagnosis of pulmonary adenocarcinoma with micropapillary pattern: does it correlate with the histologic findings? Diagn Cytopathol 2009;37:333-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  27. Loukeris K, Vazquez MF, Sica G, et al. Cytological cell blocks: Predictors of squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma subtypes. Diagn Cytopathol 2012;40:380-7. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  28. Sakurai H, Asamura H. Sublobar resection for early-stage lung cancer. Transl Lung Cancer Res 2014;3:164-72. [PubMed]
  29. Yoshizawa A, Motoi N, Riely GJ, et al. Impact of proposed IASLC/ATS/ERS classification of lung adenocarcinoma: prognostic subgroups and implications for further revision of staging based on analysis of 514 stage I cases. Mod Pathol 2011;24:653-64. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  30. Russell PA, Wainer Z, Wright GM, et al. Does lung adenocarcinoma subtype predict patient survival?: A clinicopathologic study based on the new International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer/American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society international multidisciplinary lung adenocarcinoma classification. J Thorac Oncol 2011;6:1496-504. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  31. Yanagawa N, Shiono S, Abiko M, et al. New IASLC/ATS/ERS classification and invasive tumor size are predictive of disease recurrence in stage I lung adenocarcinoma. J Thorac Oncol 2013;8:612-8. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  32. Beasley MB, Dembitzer FR, Flores RM. Surgical pathology of early stage non-small cell lung carcinoma. Ann Transl Med 2016;4:238. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  33. Travis WD, Asamura H, Bankier AA, et al. The IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project: Proposals for Coding T Categories for Subsolid Nodules and Assessment of Tumor Size in Part-Solid Tumors in the Forthcoming Eighth Edition of the TNM Classification of Lung Cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2016;11:1204-23.
  34. Del Gobbo A, Pellegrinelli A, Gaudioso G, et al. Analysis of NSCLC tumour heterogeneity, proliferative and 18F-FDG PET indices reveals Ki67 prognostic role in adenocarcinomas. Histopathology 2016;68:746-51. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  35. Kadota K, Villena-Vargas J, Yoshizawa A, et al. Prognostic significance of adenocarcinoma in situ, minimally invasive adenocarcinoma, and nonmucinous lepidic predominant invasive adenocarcinoma of the lung in patients with stage I disease. Am J Surg Pathol 2014;38:448-60. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  36. Moon Y, Lee KY, Park JK. The prognosis of invasive adenocarcinoma presenting as ground-glass opacity on chest computed tomography after sublobar resection. J Thorac Dis 2017;9:3782-92. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  37. Thunnissen E, Beasley MB, Borczuk AC, et al. Reproducibility of histopathological subtypes and invasion in pulmonary adenocarcinoma. An international interobserver study. Mod Pathol 2012;25:1574-83. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  38. Kadota K, Nitadori J, Sima CS, et al. Tumor Spread through Air Spaces is an Important Pattern of Invasion and Impacts the Frequency and Location of Recurrences after Limited Resection for Small Stage I Lung Adenocarcinomas. J Thorac Oncol 2015;10:806-14. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  39. Ren Y, Xie H, Dai C, et al. ASO Author Reflections: Spread Through Air Spaces in Margin of Sublobar Resection. Ann Surg Oncol 2019. [Epub ahead of print]. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  40. Toyokawa G, Yamada Y, Tagawa T, et al. Significance of Spread Through Air Spaces in Resected Pathological Stage I Lung Adenocarcinoma. Ann Thorac Surg 2018;105:1655-63. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  41. Goldstraw P, Chansky K, Crowley J, et al. The IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project: Proposals for Revision of the TNM Stage Groupings in the Forthcoming (Eighth) Edition of the TNM Classification for Lung Cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2016;11:39-51. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  42. Deng HY, Li G, Luo J, et al. Novel biologic factors correlated to visceral pleural invasion in early-stage non-small cell lung cancer less than 3 cm. J Thorac Dis 2018;10:2357-64. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  43. Huang H, Wang T, Hu B, et al. Visceral pleural invasion remains a size-independent prognostic factor in stage I non-small cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 2015;99:1130-9. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  44. Zhao LL, Xie HK, Zhang LP, et al. Visceral pleural invasion in lung adenocarcinoma</=3 cm with ground-glass opacity: a clinical, pathological and radiological study. J Thorac Dis 2016;8:1788-97. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  45. Moon Y, Lee KY, Park JK. Prognosis After Sublobar Resection of Small-sized Non-small Cell Lung Cancer with Visceral Pleural or Lymphovascular Invasion. World J Surg 2017;41:2769-77. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  46. Hirsch FR, Scagliotti GV, Mulshine JL, et al. Lung cancer: current therapies and new targeted treatments. Lancet 2017;389:299-311. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  47. Kuo IY, Jen J, Hsu LH, et al. A prognostic predictor panel with DNA methylation biomarkers for early-stage lung adenocarcinoma in Asian and Caucasian populations. J Biomed Sci 2016;23:58. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  48. Li X, Shi Y, Yin Z, et al. An eight-miRNA signature as a potential biomarker for predicting survival in lung adenocarcinoma. J Transl Med 2014;12:159. [Crossref] [PubMed]
  49. Li B, Cui Y, Diehn M, et al. Development and Validation of an Individualized Immune Prognostic Signature in Early-Stage Nonsquamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. JAMA Oncol 2017;3:1529-37. [Crossref] [PubMed]
Cite this article as: Boggio F, Del Gobbo A, Croci G, Barella M, Ferrero S. Early stage lung cancer: pathologist’s perspective. J Thorac Dis 2020;12(6):3343-3348. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2019.12.30