Ground glass opacity: can we correlate radiological and histological features to plan clinical decision making?
Ground glass opacity
Histopathological features
Radiological features
Journal
General thoracic and cardiovascular surgery
ISSN: 1863-6713
Titre abrégé: Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg
Pays: Japan
ID NLM: 101303952
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2022
Nov 2022
Historique:
received:
24
02
2022
accepted:
25
04
2022
pubmed:
8
5
2022
medline:
26
10
2022
entrez:
7
5
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The spectrum of ground glass opacity (GGO) is a diagnostic and clinical management quandary. The role of computed tomographic scans in detecting malignant GGO has inter-observer variability. Pure GGO have been traditionally thought to be predominantly benign in nature and has long volume doubling times. This study was undertaken to correlate the findings of radiology and histology of ground glass opacities at our institute. This study is a retrospective observational study of patients who underwent lung resection surgery for radiology proven ground glass opacities between January 2010 and December 2018. A total of 115 patients were included in the study based on inclusion and exclusion criteria and were analysed. The patients were divided into two groups; pure GGO (n = 50), mixed GGO (n = 65). The pathological tumour size was ≤ 2 cm in 51% of the patients and 27 patients had the size between 2.1 and 3.0 cm. The predominant histopathologic feature was lepidic predominance in 54 patients followed by 24 patients with acinar predominance. Among patients with radiological tumour size of ≤ 2 cm, pure GGO was present in 48% of the patients. Among patients with pure GGO, 96% of the patients had no solid component. 44 patients had only single CT scan before proceeding to surgery. All these patients had mixed GGO. Our study concludes pure GGOs, though lacking solid component have a high propensity to be malignant. The role of repeated CT surveillance in this context without offering curative surgery may be questionable.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The spectrum of ground glass opacity (GGO) is a diagnostic and clinical management quandary. The role of computed tomographic scans in detecting malignant GGO has inter-observer variability. Pure GGO have been traditionally thought to be predominantly benign in nature and has long volume doubling times. This study was undertaken to correlate the findings of radiology and histology of ground glass opacities at our institute.
METHODS
METHODS
This study is a retrospective observational study of patients who underwent lung resection surgery for radiology proven ground glass opacities between January 2010 and December 2018. A total of 115 patients were included in the study based on inclusion and exclusion criteria and were analysed.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The patients were divided into two groups; pure GGO (n = 50), mixed GGO (n = 65). The pathological tumour size was ≤ 2 cm in 51% of the patients and 27 patients had the size between 2.1 and 3.0 cm. The predominant histopathologic feature was lepidic predominance in 54 patients followed by 24 patients with acinar predominance. Among patients with radiological tumour size of ≤ 2 cm, pure GGO was present in 48% of the patients. Among patients with pure GGO, 96% of the patients had no solid component. 44 patients had only single CT scan before proceeding to surgery. All these patients had mixed GGO.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Our study concludes pure GGOs, though lacking solid component have a high propensity to be malignant. The role of repeated CT surveillance in this context without offering curative surgery may be questionable.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35524871
doi: 10.1007/s11748-022-01826-2
pii: 10.1007/s11748-022-01826-2
doi:
Types de publication
Observational Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
971-976Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to The Japanese Association for Thoracic Surgery.
Références
Migliore M, Fornito M, Palazzolo M, et al. Ground glass opacities management in the lung cancer screening era. Ann Transl Med 2018; https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2017.07.28
Chen D, Dai C, Kadeer X, et al. New horizons in surgical treatment of ground-glass nodules of the lung: experience and controversies. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2018;14:203–11. https://doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S152127 .
doi: 10.2147/TCRM.S152127
pubmed: 29430182
pmcid: 5797461
Lee C-T. What do we know about ground-glass opacity nodules in the lung? Transl Lung Cancer Res. 2015;4:656–9. https://doi.org/10.3978/j.issn.2218-6751.2015.04.05 .
doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2218-6751.2015.04.05
pubmed: 26629441
pmcid: 4630533
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. https://doi.org/10.1097/JTO.0b013e318206a221 .
doi: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e318206a221
pubmed: 21252716
pmcid: 4513953
Hasegawa M, Sone S, Takashima S, et al. Growth rate of small lung cancers detected on mass CT screening. Br J Radiol. 2000;73:1252–9. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.73.876.11205667 .
doi: 10.1259/bjr.73.876.11205667
pubmed: 11205667
Huang C, Wang C, Wang Y, et al. The prognostic significance of pure ground glass opacities in lung cancer computed tomographic images. J Cancer. 2019;10:6888–95. https://doi.org/10.7150/jca.33132 .
doi: 10.7150/jca.33132
pubmed: 31839823
pmcid: 6909955
Suzuki K, Koike T, Asakawa T, et al. A prospective radiological study of thin-section computed tomography to predict pathological noninvasiveness in peripheral clinical IA lung cancer (Japan Clinical Oncology Group 0201). J Thorac Oncol. 2011;6:751–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/JTO.0b013e31821038ab .
doi: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e31821038ab
pubmed: 21325976
Son JY, Lee HY, Lee KS, et al. Quantitative CT analysis of pulmonary ground-glass opacity nodules for the distinction of invasive adenocarcinoma from pre-invasive or minimally invasive adenocarcinoma. PLoS ONE. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0104066 .
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0104066
pubmed: 25426992
pmcid: 4245191
Lim H-J, Ahn S, Lee KS, et al. Persistent pure ground-glass opacity lung nodules ≥ 10 mm in diameter at CT scan: histopathologic comparisons and prognostic implications. Chest. 2013;144:1291–9. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.12-2987 .
doi: 10.1378/chest.12-2987
pubmed: 23722583
Mimae T, Miyata Y, Tsutani Y, et al. What are the radiologic findings predictive of indolent lung adenocarcinoma? Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2015;45:367–72. https://doi.org/10.1093/jjco/hyv005 .
doi: 10.1093/jjco/hyv005
pubmed: 25628349
Detterbeck FC. More opaque than clear: reality is always cloaked in shades of gray. Oncology (Williston Park). 2016;30:275–6.
Aokage K, Saji H, Suzuki K, et al. A non-randomized confirmatory trial of segmentectomy for clinical T1N0 lung cancer with dominant ground glass opacity based on thin-section computed tomography (JCOG1211). Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017;65:267–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11748-016-0741-1 .
doi: 10.1007/s11748-016-0741-1
pubmed: 28255781
Okada M, Koike T, Higashiyama M, et al. Radical sublobar resection for small-sized non-small cell lung cancer: a multicenter study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2006;132:769–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2006.02.063 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2006.02.063
pubmed: 17000286
Rami-Porta R, Tsuboi M. Sublobar resection for lung cancer. Eur Respir J. 2009;33:426–35. https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.00099808 .
doi: 10.1183/09031936.00099808
pubmed: 19181916
Zha J, Xie D, Xie H, et al. Recognition of “aggressive” behavior in “indolent” ground glass opacity and mixed density lesions. J Thorac Dis. 2016;8:1460–8. https://doi.org/10.21037/jtd.2016.05.33 .
doi: 10.21037/jtd.2016.05.33
pubmed: 27499932
pmcid: 4958837
Jennings SG, Winer-Muram HT, Tarver RD, et al. Lung tumor growth: assessment with CT–comparison of diameter and cross-sectional area with volume measurements. Radiology. 2004;231:866–71. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2313030715 .
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2313030715
pubmed: 15163822
Kobayashi Y, Fukui T, Ito S, et al. How long should small lung lesions of ground-glass opacity be followed? J Thorac Oncol. 2013;8:309–14. https://doi.org/10.1097/JTO.0b013e31827e2435 .
doi: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e31827e2435
pubmed: 23399958
Yatabe Y, Borczuk AC, Powell CA. Do all lung adenocarcinomas follow a stepwise progression? Lung Cancer. 2011;74:7–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lungcan.2011.05.021 .
doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2011.05.021
pubmed: 21705107
Kobayashi Y, Mitsudomi T, Sakao Y, et al. Genetic features of pulmonary adenocarcinoma presenting with ground-glass nodules: the differences between nodules with and without growth. Ann Oncol. 2015;26:156–61. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdu505 .
doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdu505
pubmed: 25361983
Zhang Y, Fu F, Chen H. Management of ground-glass opacities in the lung cancer spectrum. Ann Thorac Surg. 2020;110:1796–804. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.04.094 .
doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.04.094
pubmed: 32525031
Hasegawa M, Sakai F, Ishikawa R, et al. CT Features of epidermal growth factor receptor-mutated adenocarcinoma of the lung: comparison with nonmutated adenocarcinoma. J Thorac Oncol. 2016;11:819–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2016.02.010 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jtho.2016.02.010
pubmed: 26917231
Glynn C, Zakowski MF, Ginsberg MS. Are there imaging characteristics associated with epidermal growth factor receptor and KRAS mutations in patients with adenocarcinoma of the lung with bronchioloalveolar features? J Thorac Oncol. 2010;5:344–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181ce9a7a .
doi: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181ce9a7a
pubmed: 20087229
Rizzo S, Petrella F, Buscarino V, et al. CT Radiogenomic characterization of EGFR, K-RAS, and ALK mutations in non-small cell lung cancer. Eur Radiol. 2016;26:32–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-015-3814-0 .
doi: 10.1007/s00330-015-3814-0
pubmed: 25956936
Hattori A, Suzuki K, Takamochi K, et al. Prognostic impact of a ground-glass opacity component in clinical stage IA non–small cell lung cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2021;161:1469–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2020.01.107 .
doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2020.01.107
pubmed: 32451073