Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25349703›Full record

ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2014

The new IASLC/ATS/ERS lung adenocarcinoma classification from a clinical perspective: current concepts and future prospects.

Jon Zugazagoitia, Ana Belen Enguita, Juan Antonio Nuñez, Lara Iglesias, Santiago Ponce

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Relationship betweenKorean journal of radiology · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. KScientific reports · 2021
    Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jon Zugazagoitia1 Medical Oncology Department, 2 Pathology Department, Hospital 12 de Octubre, Instituto de Investigación Hospital 12 de Octubre i+12, Madrid, Spain.
Ana Belen Enguita1 Medical Oncology Department, 2 Pathology Department, Hospital 12 de Octubre, Instituto de Investigación Hospital 12 de Octubre i+12, Madrid, Spain.
Juan Antonio Nuñez1 Medical Oncology Department, 2 Pathology Department, Hospital 12 de Octubre, Instituto de Investigación Hospital 12 de Octubre i+12, Madrid, Spain.
Lara Iglesias1 Medical Oncology Department, 2 Pathology Department, Hospital 12 de Octubre, Instituto de Investigación Hospital 12 de Octubre i+12, Madrid, Spain.
Santiago Ponce1 Medical Oncology Department, 2 Pathology Department, Hospital 12 de Octubre, Instituto de Investigación Hospital 12 de Octubre i+12, Madrid, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The new the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC)/the American Thoracic Society (ATS)/the European Respiratory Society (ERS) pathologic classification of lung cancer has markedly changed the pathologic diagnosis of lung adenocarcinoma. This classification deals with many aspects that directly affect clinical practice, and opens new gateways for future research. By means of a multidisciplinary approach, it differs significantly from the former 2004 the World Health Organization (WHO) classification, which was mainly written by pathologist. The present review, in line with the consensus article, is divided in two components: the diagnosis and classification of lung adenocarcinoma in resection specimens and the diagnosis of lung cancer in small biopsies and cytology. Resection specimens are currently classified according to the predominant histologic pattern after comprehensive subtyping in 5% increments. This approach has led to the addition of new pathologic subtypes [adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS), minimally invasive adenocarcinoma (MIA) and micropapillary predominant adenocarcinoma)] and to the discontinuation of some heterogeneous entities included in the former 2004 WHO classification (mixed subtype adenocarcinoma and bronchioloalveolar carcinoma). Overall, these changes have resulted in a better stratification of lung adenocarcinoma tumors in more homogeneous morphologic, clinical and biological subgroups. Pathologic subtyping has demonstrated prognostic utility in resected stage I-III patients, and recent data support their predictive role for the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy. Moreover, comprehensive pathologic subtyping may potentially affect TNM staging and surgical management or early-stage tumors. On the other hand, for the first time, the novel pathologic classification provides standardized terminology and diagnostic criteria of small biopsies and cytology. Criteria are proposed not only for adenocarcinoma but also for other histologies, but special emphasis was put on the distinction between adenocarcinoma and squamous-cell carcinoma due to its major clinical implications. This review outlines the main issues of the new lung adenocarcinoma classification from a clinical perspective. We describe the different pathologic subtypes in resection specimens, with their most relevant clinical implications. Further on, we address the new terminology and diagnostic criteria for lung adenocarcinomas in small specimens, oriented to their importance for the management and treatment of metastatic lung cancer patients. Finally, we discuss some unanswered questions and relevant issues for the near future.

Indexed as

adenocarcinomaclinical relevanceNon-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC)/the American Thoracic Society (ATS)/the European Respiratory Society (ERS) pathologic classification

Identifiers

PMID25349703
PMCPMC4209392

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.