4.1 Article

Large Cell Carcinoma of the Lung An Endangered Species?

Journal

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/PAI.0b013e31819bfd59

Keywords

large cell carcinoma; lung; immunohistochemistry; squamous cell carcinoma; adenocarcinoma

Funding

  1. Health Department of the Government of Navarra [530/2006]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aims to evaluate large cell carcinomas (LCC) of the lung with a panel of immunohistochemical markers in an attempt to identify tumors belonging to other categories. We analyzed a tissue microarray platform of 101 LCC with a panel of 31 monoclonal antibodies. The tumors were 82 (81.3%) classic LCC, 7 (6.9%) neuroendocrine LCC, 6 (5.9'%) lymphoepithelioma-like LCC, 3 (2.9%) basaloid LCC, 2 (2%) clear cell LCC, and 1 (1%) LCC with rhabdoid phenotype. Characteristic classic LCC immunophenotype was loss of staining with CK5/6, CK14 positive in most squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), lack of MOC 31 positive in most adenocarcinomas, and positive immunoreactivity to EGFR, PDGFR-alpha and c-kit. 27 of 82 classic LCC (32.9%) were re-classified as adenocarcinomas, because they coexpressed TTF-1, CK7, and CK19, and were negative for p63. 31 (37.8%) of 82 classic LCC were reclassified as poorly differentiated SCC, based on their immunoreactivity with 34 beta E12, p63, thrombomodulin, and CD44v6. 16 (19.5%) of 82 classic LCC correspond to undifferentiated adenosquamous carcinomas, since they displayed conflicting immunostaining for markers of both SCC and adenocarcinomas. The use of 7 immunohistochemical markers, consisting of TTF-1, CK7, CK19, p63, 34 beta E12, thrombomodulin, and CD44v6, markedly reduces dramatically to less than 10%, the number of classic LCC by readily identifying cases of poorly differentiated SCCs, adenosquatnous carcinoma and adenocarcinomas.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available