Micropapillary and solid components as high-grade patterns in IASLC grading system of lung adenocarcinoma: Clinical implications and management

Abstract

ObjectivesThe grading system proposed by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer is based on a combination of predominant histologic subtypes and the proportion of high-grade components with a cutoff of 20%. We aimed to examine the clinical implications of the grading system beyond the discrimination of patient prognosis, while assessing the biological differences among high-grade subtypes. MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 648 consecutive patients with resected lung adenocarcinomas and examined their clinicopathologic, genotypic, and immunophenotypic features and treatment outcomes. Besides the differences among grades, the clinical impact of different high-grade components: micropapillary (MIP) and solid (SOL) patterns, was individually evaluated. ResultsSurvival outcomes were well-stratified according to the grading system. Grade 3 tumors exhibited aggressive clinicopathologic features, while being an independent prognostic factor in multivariable analysis. A small proportion (<20 %) of high-grade components in grade 2 had a negative prognostic impact. The prognostic difference bordering on the 20 % cutoff of the MIP proportion was validated; however, the proportion of SOL component did not affect prognosis. A survival benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy was observed in grade 3 tumors regardless of histologic subtype, but not in grade 1–2 tumors. The molecular and immunophenotypic features were different among grades, but still heterogeneous in grade 3, with MIP harboring frequent EGFR mutation and SOL exhibiting high PD-L1 expression. The treatment outcome after recurrence was worse in grade 3, but tumors with MIP pattern had an equivalent prognosis to that of grade 1–2 tumors, reflecting the high frequency of molecular targeted therapy. ConclusionsIn addition to stratifying patient prognosis, the current grading system could discriminate clinical course, therapeutic effects of adjuvant chemotherapy, and molecular and immunophenotypic features. Further stratification based on biological heterogeneity in grade 3 remains necessary to enhance the role of the grading system in guiding patient management.