Not yet a member?

Limited Resections for Very Small NSCLC Tumors and BAC


February 11, 2007 - 5:34 pm printer friendly view / write comments
 votes, average: 0 out of 5 votes, average: 0 out of 5 votes, average: 0 out of 5 votes, average: 0 out of 5 votes, average: 0 out of 5 (0 votes, average: 0 out of 5)
You need to be a registered member to rate this post.
Loading ... Loading ...
Dr. West

  While lobectomy or pneumonectomy may be the surgical treatment of choice for most NSCLC tumors in younger, fit patients, a limited resection may be an ideal choice in certain settings.  In my previous post I discussed the data supporting a limited resection in older patients, who are likely to have competing health risks that may make it less critical to pursue the most aggressive surgical strategy.  Another situation in which a sub-lobar resection may be particularly appealing is when the tumor is quite small and/or has characteristics suggestive of an indolent natural history.  In such cases, a lobectomy may be more surgery than is required.  There are trials now asking the question of whether patients with the most favorable features based on size or histology (microscopic characteristics) may do as well or better with limited resections than the standard lobectomy or pneumonectomy.

   One of the first issues is in identifying the right population for which special management should be considered.  Stage IA is defined as a tumor less than 3 cm that does not involve the pleura (the lining around the lung) and is not too close to important structures in the middle of the chest, and this is the stage with the best prognosis after treatment of NSCLC.  However, even within that group, several recent studies have shown that survival is particularly favorable for patients with tumors that are 2 cm or smaller.  For example, Gajra and colleagues from Syracuse (abstract here) found that among their 246 consecutive patients with stage IA NSCLC tumors, survival was significantly better for those with tumors of 1.5 cm or less vs. those with larger tumors of 1.6 - 3.0 cm (5 year overall survival 85.5% vs. 78.6%, respectively).   Very similar results were demonstrated in a series from NYC by Port and colleagues (abstract here), who analyzed results from 244 patients with stage IA NSCLC and found that the 5-year overall survival was 77% for those with tumors 2 cm or less, compared with 60% for those with larger tumors from 2.1 to 3.0 cm.  Additional work from the group in NYC (abstract here) also showed that patients with tumors 2 cm or smaller had involvement of hilar lymph nodes half as often as the patients with larger stage IA tumors.  

   One study from more than a decade ago, by Warren and colleagues (abstract here), showed that the five-year survival of patients with tumors 2 cm or less were not significantly different if they underwent a segmentectomy compared to a lobectomy.  However, it has been primarily more recently work that has established some momentum for sublobar resections in smaller tumors, especially work out of Japan, where the focus has been on small tumors with bronchioloalveolar carcinoma (BAC) histology.

   Bronchioloalveolar carcinoma (BAC) tumors have been particularly identified as potentially demonstrating an indolent natural history and favorable survival, as I indicated in a previous post.   In a retrospective review from Massachusetts General Hospital, the investigators compared survival among 33 patients with stage I BAC tumors to the survival of 105 other patients with stage I non-BAC adenocarcinomas (abstract here).  They reported that the 5-year survival was 20% higher in the BAC patients:

Breathnach stage I BAC vs other adenoca (click to enlarge)

Much of the leading work on sublobar resections in BAC has emerged out of Japan, where BAC is especially common.  Such studies have demonstrated that peripheral (toward the outer edges of the lung) adenocarcinomas less than 2 cm have relatively low rates of lymph node involvement, especially BAC (abstract here).  Several recent small prospective trials out of Japan (abstracts here and here) have performed limited resection on small BAC tumors and seen no evidence of recurrences and 100% survival in the first 2-3 years of follow-up.  Other, larger trials directly comparing sub-lobar resection to lobectomy are currently being conducted in Japan.

   In the US, the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) is running a propsective phase III trial randomizing patients with small (2 cm or less in diameter), peripheral NSCLC tumors to lobectomy vs. wedge resection or segmentectomy.  Patients will undergo a mediastinoscopy to confirm no evidence of involvement of any accessible lymph nodes and will then be randomized intra-operatively to one type of surgery or the other (so before going to the operating room, people will need to know they could receive either type of surgery).  Other cancer cooperative groups are joining this important trial, so it will be running throughout North America, and it will plan to accrue up to nearly 1300 patients, looking for significant differences in the rate of NSCLC recurrence by the type of surgery performed.  The trial, led by Dr. Nasser Altorki from NYU, is known by the rather un-catchy name “CALGB 140503″ and should become widely available soon. 

   Until then, the more extensive lobectomy or pneumonectomy surgeries remain the standard of care, but the study from CALGB and work emerging from Japan may lead us to refine that position.

 

Posted in: Bronchioloalveolar Carcinoma (BAC), Bronchioloalveolar Carcinoma (BAC), Core Concepts, Early Stage NSCLC & Surgery, Early Stage NSCLC (Stage I/II), Lung Cancer, Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC), Special Populations in Lung Cancer, Surgery Issues, Treatment Digg    StumbleUpon    Furl    reddit    Delicious    printer friendly



  1. February 11, 2007 - 7:54 pm

    Dr. West:

    Thanks for the interesting notes on BAC and limited resection.

    I have a question on your statement: “Such studies have demonstrated that peripheral (toward the outer edges of the lung) adenocarcinomas less than 2 cm have very low rates of lymph node involvement (abstract here)”.

    When I checked the abstract, it said that: “Micrometastasis was detected in 49 lymph nodes (3.4%) of 21 patients (20.4%)”. It seems to me that metastasis to lymph nodes in 20% of the patients with small & peripheral adenocarcinoma tumors is rather a big percentage, isn’t it?

    On a related question, the abstract says that there were no micrometastasis found in patients with BAC, or “localized bronchioloalveolar carcinoma with foci of collapse of alveolar structure”. Are those types of tumors what we call “Adenocarcinomas with BAC features”?

    Thanks again.

    Carlos

    ortizbazurto
  2. February 11, 2007 - 9:31 pm

    Carlos,

    You make a good point, as the low lymph node involvement is really much more of a truism for BAC than for other adenocarcinomas. I really meant to emphasize that low incidence of nodal involvement in small BAC tumors. I’ll change my wording to be more clear.

    As for your second question, adenocarcinoma with BAC features can be a very heterogeneous definition, but in Japan, they tend to be much more precise. I would say that the wording they describe would really be closer to pure BAC. It refers to the “Noguchi classification” that ranges from pure BAC to invasive adenocarcinoma as you go from Noguchi A to Noguchi D. The quote you included describes Noguchi B, but many of the adenocarcinomas with BAC features in the US would be more like a Noguchi C. However, the whole spectrum of BAC and adenocarcinoma with BAC features remains muddy, even among the expert pathologists.

    -Dr. West

    Dr West
Sections
Search

Forums
Our Supporters
  • Ms. Theresa Lovin
  • Ms. Katie Brown & Family
  • Ms. Millie Marnin
  • Mr. & Mrs. Thomas Olson
  • Mrs. Debi Malone
  • Ms. Marjan Naghavi
  • Mr. Khahn Doan
  • Ms. Beverly Wigney
  • The Horgan Family
  • Ms. Corinna Wong
  • Ms. Rhea Rollins
  • Mr. & Mrs. Robert E. Meston
  • Ms. Karen Brindle
  • Mr. & Mrs. Thomas Allison
  • Mr. Gordon Lindquist
  • Ms. Shirley Kuo
  • Mrs. Ruth Zimmers
  • Mr. Michael Gwynn
  • Mr. Mark Matheos
  • Ms. Dianne C. Brindle & family
  • Dr. Bernard Goffe
  • Mr. Kurt Lehrmann
  • Ms. Janet Hoey
  • Mr. & Mrs. Brett Forrest
  • Mr. & Mrs. Oliver Flor
  • Ms. Lisa Smith
  • Mr. & Mrs. Peter Z. Cahan
  • Ms. Sumi Almquist & Family
  • Mrs. Linda Pfannm�ller
  • Mr. & Mrs. Gary Broomell
  • Ms. Marjorie Walter
  • Ms. Debra Chidester-Clampett
  • Mr. & Mrs. Jason Oliger
  • Ms. Janet Cooper
  • Ms. Dorothy Fribock
  • Dr. Neil Berch
  • Mr. & Mrs. William S. Gilbert
  • Mr. & Mrs. Robert Heller
  • Mrs. Judith Curley
  • Maruha Nichiro Holdings
  • Mr. Than Hoang
  • Ms. Lois Hunter
  • Mrs. Myrtle Chidester
  • Dr. & Mrs. Robert H. Stark
  • Ms. Eileen Foley
  • Mr. & Mrs. Kevin Blair
  • Mr. & Mrs. Jason Brown
  • Mr. Trevor Beeston
  • Mr. Steve Kallman
  • Ms. Jean M. Kamla
  • Mr. Robert Hall
  • Mr. Douglas Holbeck
  • Mrs. Susan Bronstein
  • Mrs. Laurel Bandy
  • Ms. Cherie Tofthagen
  • Ms. Sharon Lowe
  • Ms. Pamela Bishop
  • Mr. Scott Robinson
  • Ms. Carole Lucock
  • Ms. Cynthia Langhorne
  • Dr. Melita Hunt
  • Dr. & Mrs. Howard V. Jones
  • Mr. & Mrs. Alec Brindle
  • Mrs. Melissa Zhao
  • Mr. Atul Shukla
  • Ms. Jennifer Chu
  • Mr. Leon Nedbalek
  • The Wise Family - Blake, Linda, Jack, & Luke
  • Mr. & Mrs. Raymond Landry
  • Mr. & Mrs. Thomas McIlraith
  • Mr. & Mrs. Sam Nishikawa
  • Mr. Timothy Smyer
  • Mr. & Mrs. Kenneth R. Hill
  • Mr. & Mrs. Chris Steele
  • Mr. Roger W. Evans
  • Mr. Norm Onofrychuk
  • Villa Park Orchards Association
  • Dr. Howard West
  • Ms. Angelia G. Ashley
  • Mr. Tommie Dickson
  • Mr. Tien Hoang
  • Mr. & Mrs. George Plumis
  • Ms. Sue Jarrell
  • Mr. George Breeden
  • Mr. & Mrs. Jason Russo
  • Mr. & Mrs. Michael Meeks
  • Mr. Adrian O. Pollner
  • Mr. Jon Gordon
  • Mrs. Karen Anglin
  • Alaska General Seafoods
  • Mr. Barry Haigis
  • Peter Pan Seafoods
  • Ms. Kimberly Benson
Quick Resources
Syndication
Poll
  • Would you want to take a cancer treatment with modest side effects that improved progression-free survival but not overall survival?
  • No (27%, 3 Votes)
  • Yes (55%, 6 Votes)
  • I'd discuss with family or toss a coin (18%, 2 Votes)
  • Total Votes: 11