García-Yuste Mariano, Molins Laureano, Matilla José M, González-Aragoneses Federico, López-Pujol Javier, Ramos Guillermo, de la Torre Mercedes
Servicio de Cirugía Torácica, Hospital Clínico Universitario, Valladolid, España.
Arch Bronconeumol. 2007 Oct;43(10):549-56. doi: 10.1016/s1579-2129(07)60126-8.
The aim of this study was to analyze trends in a variety of prognostic factors for neuroendocrine lung carcinomas through analysis of 2 groups of surgically treated patients.
Group A contained the first 361 patients, treated between 1980 and 1997. That group was analyzed retrospectively and contained 261 patients with typical carcinoid tumors, 43 with atypical carcinoid tumors, 22 with large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma, and 35 with small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma. Group B contained 404 patients enrolled prospectively between 1998 and 2002: 308 with typical carcinoid tumors, 49 with atypical carcinoid tumors, 18 with large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma, and 29 with small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma. The following clinical variables were considered: sex, mean age, tumor site, tumor size, lymph node involvement, stage, metastasis, and local recurrence. The 1997 TNM classification was used for staging of lung cancer and survival analysis was performed along with assessment of factors influencing survival. Statistical analysis of the data involved univariate and multivariate analysis.
In both groups, significant differences were observed between patients with typical and atypical carcinoid tumors in terms of mean age, tumor size, node involvement, and recurrence. In group A, female sex, node involvement, and recurrence differed between patients with atypical carcinoid tumors and those with large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma; the same was true for group B, with the exception of lymph node involvement. Node involvement differed between patients with small-cell versus large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma in group A but not group B. Both groups displayed significant differences in overall survival and survival of patients with lymph node involvement between patients with typical and atypical carcinoid tumors and between patients with atypical carcinoid tumors and those with large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma; no differences were observed between patients with large-cell versus small-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma. Histological type and lymph node involvement had the greatest influence on prognosis in the multivariate analysis.
A well-defined trend is observed in prognostic factors for neuroendocrine lung tumors. Histological type and lymph node involvement show the greatest influence on survival.
本研究旨在通过分析两组接受手术治疗的患者,来分析神经内分泌肺癌多种预后因素的变化趋势。
A组包含1980年至1997年间治疗的前361例患者。该组进行回顾性分析,包括261例典型类癌患者、43例非典型类癌患者、22例大细胞神经内分泌癌患者和35例小细胞神经内分泌癌患者。B组包含1998年至2002年间前瞻性纳入的404例患者:308例典型类癌患者、49例非典型类癌患者、18例大细胞神经内分泌癌患者和29例小细胞神经内分泌癌患者。考虑了以下临床变量:性别、平均年龄、肿瘤部位、肿瘤大小、淋巴结受累情况、分期、转移和局部复发。采用1997年TNM分类对肺癌进行分期,并进行生存分析以及影响生存因素的评估。数据的统计分析包括单因素和多因素分析。
在两组中,典型类癌和非典型类癌患者在平均年龄、肿瘤大小、淋巴结受累和复发方面均存在显著差异。在A组中,非典型类癌患者与大细胞神经内分泌癌患者在性别、淋巴结受累和复发方面存在差异;B组情况相同,但淋巴结受累情况除外。A组中小细胞神经内分泌癌患者与大细胞神经内分泌癌患者在淋巴结受累方面存在差异,而B组无此差异。两组中,典型类癌和非典型类癌患者之间以及非典型类癌和大细胞神经内分泌癌患者之间在总生存和有淋巴结受累患者的生存方面均存在显著差异;大细胞神经内分泌癌和小细胞神经内分泌癌患者之间未观察到差异。在多因素分析中,组织学类型和淋巴结受累对预后影响最大。
神经内分泌肺肿瘤的预后因素呈现出明确的变化趋势。组织学类型和淋巴结受累对生存影响最大。