Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • For authors
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Author FAQs
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • For authors
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Author FAQs
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions

Why we should improve current practice of diagnosing and treating pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinomas in patients with advanced disease

Jules Derks, Robert Jan van Suylen, Erik Thunnissen, Michael den Bakker, Harry Groen, Egbert Smit, Ronald Damhuis, Esther van den Broek, Ernst-Jan Speel, Anne-Marie C. Dingemans
European Respiratory Journal 2017 50: 1701658; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.01658-2017
Jules Derks
1Dept of Pulmonary Diseases, GROW school for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Robert Jan van Suylen
2Pathology-DNA, location Jeroen Bosch Hospital, s’ Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Erik Thunnissen
3Dept of Pathology, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michael den Bakker
4Dept of Pathology, Maasstad hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
5Dept of Pathology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Harry Groen
6Dept of Pulmonary Diseases, University of Groningen and University Medical Centre, Groningen, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Egbert Smit
7Dept of Pulmonary Diseases, VU medical center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
8Dept of Thoracic Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ronald Damhuis
9Department Research, Comprehensive Cancer Association, Utrecht, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Esther van den Broek
10PALGA Foundation, Houten, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ernst-Jan Speel
11Dept of Pathology, GROW school for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Anne-Marie C. Dingemans
1Dept of Pulmonary Diseases, GROW school for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: a.dingemans@mumc.nl
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Current criteria for LCNEC diagnosed on a biopsy specimen are in need of improvement http://ow.ly/lRP730fu552

From the authors:

In response to our manuscript on first-line chemotherapy treatment for metastatic pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) [1], Rossi and co-workers raised their concerns about the validity of our results by questioning the accuracy of LCNEC diagnosis on a biopsy specimen. We would like to thank the authors for their critical appraisal, underscoring the need to increase awareness among pulmonologists, oncologists and pathologists of the diagnostic issues and consequences of metastatic LCNEC diagnosed on a biopsy specimen.

The diagnostic criteria for LCNEC according to the current World Health Organization (WHO) classification (2015) include a high number of mitoses (>10 mitoses per 2 mm2), neuroendocrine morphology such as rosettes, trabecular growth pattern or palisading of cells, and neuroendocrine differentiation identified by immunohistochemical markers or electron microscopy [2]. Although the current classification provides tools to diagnose lung cancer on small biopsies, this is not the case for LCNEC. Nevertheless a diagnosis of “nonsmall cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) favouring LCNEC” can be made if the above criteria are identified in a biopsy specimen.

A comparison of pre-operative biopsy with the surgical resection specimen from identical anatomic locations including carcinoids and LCNEC/small cell lung cancer (SCLC), demonstrated that a Ki-67 cut-off of >20% is specific and sensitive on a biopsy specimen to separate carcinoid from high-grade neuroendocrine carcinomas [3]. We recently proposed introduction of neuroendocrine markers along with thyroid transcription factor-1 and p40 into the diagnostic panel aiming to increase the yield of LCNEC diagnoses on biopsies [4]. This is important because in pre-operatively obtained biopsy specimens of surgically confirmed LCNEC, neuroendocrine morphology may be difficult to recognise leading to a diagnosis of NSCLC-not otherwise specified (NOS) or favouring adenocarcinoma diagnosis. The application of additional neuroendocrine markers and use of core needle biopsies may solve these diagnostic issues in LCNEC (J. Derks and co-workers; unpublished data).

In our study on the treatment of metastatic LCNEC, three expert thoracic pathologists reviewed 207 cases that were diagnosed as LCNEC between 2003 and 2012 [1]. Eventually, 62% were confirmed as LCNEC, other diagnoses included were (atypical) carcinoid, SCLC and NSCLC with neuroendocrine differentiation. Since LCNEC has only been officially recognised by the WHO since 1999, it is understandable that the percentage of LCNEC identified in our study is higher than that in the work of Rossi et al. [5], who studied LCNEC from 1990 to 2004. In previous work, we reported that LCNEC is diagnosed with an increased frequency on biopsy specimens [6]. Thus, although the WHO 2015 classification may not promote the diagnosis of LCNEC on a biopsy specimen, this frequently occurs in daily practice, putting clinicians on the spot how to treat such patients.

The aim of our study was to evaluate different chemotherapy treatments in de novo metastatic LCNEC in current clinical practice. Our results indicate that LCNEC should not be routinely treated as SCLC. In addition to the results obtained in our study, this is also supported by a phase II trial showing favourable effects of carboplatin–paclitaxel chemotherapy followed by maintenance everolimus (mTOR inhibitor) [7]. Although the study of Rossi et al. [5] only included surgical resection specimens, the results may be biased as they compared only a few LCNEC patients (n=27) part of whom were treated with radiotherapy and/or without a platinum compound in the NSCLC treatment arm. Furthermore, the median survival rates observed for metastatic LCNEC in the study of Rossi et al. (i.e. 51 months in the platinum–etoposide arm versus ±7 months reported by a phase II study) seems unusually high and may suggest patient selection [8].

In their correspondence, Rossi and co-workers referred to molecular findings in LCNEC published by Rekhtman et al. [9] (n=45 LCNEC). Previously, similar data were also presented by George et al. [10] (n=75). Both studies proposed that LCNEC should be subdivided into at least two subtypes, i.e. a TP53-RB1 mutated subtype (SCLC like) and LCNEC exhibiting a mutation in STK11, KEAP1 or KRAS with wild-type RB1 (NSCLC like). It is tempting to speculate that these molecular subgroups relate to chemotherapy outcomes in LCNEC. In this context, at the American Society of Clinical Oncology 2017 meeting we presented our analysis of the, in part, current cohort of LCNEC (published in the European Respiratory Journal (ERJ)) for these molecular subtypes using next-generation sequencing [11]. This analysis indeed suggests that the treatment outcomes of metastatic LCNEC may be influenced by different molecular subtypes. Patients having LCNEC with RB1 wild-type (and/or STK11 mutations, i.e. “NSCLC like”) had longer overall and progression-free survival when treated with platinum-gemcitabine or taxane chemotherapy versus platinum-etoposide chemotherapy.

In summary, we support the call for a consensus definition from Rossi and co-workers. The WHO 2015 criteria for LCNEC diagnosed on a biopsy specimen are in need of improvement and should include, amongst others, molecular analysis of LCNEC validated within a large multicentre clinical trial. Nevertheless, until such studies have been performed, the work we presented in the ERJ represents the largest comparison of first-line chemotherapy treatment in carefully pathology revised confirmed metastatic LCNEC. Taken together, when it comes to studying LCNEC “size does matter” but it is likely that in the near future a “small (biopsy) size fits all”.

Footnotes

  • Conflict of interest: None declared.

  • Received August 16, 2017.
  • Accepted September 16, 2017.
  • Copyright ©ERS 2017

References

  1. ↵
    1. Derks JL,
    2. van Suylen RJ,
    3. Thunnissen E
    , et al. Chemotherapy for pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinomas: does the regimen matter? Eur Respir J 2017; 49: 1601838.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. Travis WD,
    2. Brambilla E,
    3. Burke AP
    , et al. Introduction to the 2015 World Health Organization classification of tumors of the lung, pleura, thymus, and heart. J Thorac Oncol 2015; 10: 1240–1242.
    OpenUrl
  3. ↵
    1. Fabbri A,
    2. Cossa M,
    3. Sonzogni A
    , et al. Ki-67 labeling index of neuroendocrine tumors of the lung has a high level of correspondence between biopsy samples and surgical specimens when strict counting guidelines are applied. Virchows Arch 2017; 470: 153–164.
    OpenUrl
  4. ↵
    1. Derks JL,
    2. Speel EJ,
    3. Dingemans AM
    . An unmet need in the WHO 2015 biopsy classification: poorly differentiated NSCCs with positive neuroendocrine markers. J Thorac Oncol 2016; 11: e25–e26.
    OpenUrl
  5. ↵
    1. Rossi G,
    2. Cavazza A,
    3. Marchioni A
    , et al. Role of chemotherapy and the receptor tyrosine kinases KIT, PDGFRα, PDGFRβ, and Met in large-cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the lung. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 8774–8785.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    1. Derks JL,
    2. van Suylen RJ,
    3. Thunnissen E
    , et al. A population-based analysis of application of WHO nomenclature in pathology reports of pulmonary neuroendocrine tumors. J Thorac Oncol 2016; 11: 593–602.
    OpenUrl
  7. ↵
    1. Christopoulos P,
    2. Engel-Riedel W,
    3. Grohé C
    , et al. Everolimus with paclitaxel and carboplatin as first-line treatment for metastatic large-cell neuroendocrine lung carcinoma: a multicenter phase II trial. Ann Oncol 2017; 28: 1898–1902.
    OpenUrl
  8. ↵
    1. Le Treut J,
    2. Sault MC,
    3. Lena H
    , et al. Multicentre phase II study of cisplatin-etoposide chemotherapy for advanced large-cell neuroendocrine lung carcinoma: the GFPC 0302 study. Ann Oncol 2013; 24: 1548–1552.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Rekhtman N,
    2. Pietanza MC,
    3. Hellmann M
    , et al. Next-generation sequencing of pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma reveals small cell carcinoma-like and non-small cell carcinoma-like subsets. Clin Cancer Res 2016; 22: 3618–3629.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    1. George J,
    2. Fernandez-Cuesta L,
    3. Vonn W
    , et al. Comparative analysis of small cell lung cancer and other pulmonary neuroendocrine tumors. AACR Cancer Res 2016; 76: Suppl., Abstract nr 122.
  11. ↵
    1. Derks J,
    2. Leblay N,
    3. van Suylen RJ
    , et al. Genetic subtypes of large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma (LCNEC) to predict response to chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2017; 35: Suppl., 9061–9061.
    OpenUrl
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
View this article with LENS
Vol 50 Issue 4 Table of Contents
European Respiratory Journal: 50 (4)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Why we should improve current practice of diagnosing and treating pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinomas in patients with advanced disease
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
Why we should improve current practice of diagnosing and treating pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinomas in patients with advanced disease
Jules Derks, Robert Jan van Suylen, Erik Thunnissen, Michael den Bakker, Harry Groen, Egbert Smit, Ronald Damhuis, Esther van den Broek, Ernst-Jan Speel, Anne-Marie C. Dingemans
European Respiratory Journal Oct 2017, 50 (4) 1701658; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.01658-2017

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Why we should improve current practice of diagnosing and treating pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinomas in patients with advanced disease
Jules Derks, Robert Jan van Suylen, Erik Thunnissen, Michael den Bakker, Harry Groen, Egbert Smit, Ronald Damhuis, Esther van den Broek, Ernst-Jan Speel, Anne-Marie C. Dingemans
European Respiratory Journal Oct 2017, 50 (4) 1701658; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.01658-2017
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Subjects

  • Lung cancer
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

Agora

  • Non-animal models for COVID-19 lung research
  • User-life of ICS/LABA inhaler devices should be considered
  • Genetically proxied IL-6 receptor inhibition in COVID-19 and pneumonia
Show more Agora

Correspondence

  • Non-animal models for COVID-19 lung research
  • User-life of ICS/LABA inhaler devices should be considered
  • Peripheral blood eosinophil counts in European and East Asian populations
Show more Correspondence

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About the ERJ

  • Journal information
  • Editorial board
  • Reviewers
  • CME
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Instructions for authors
  • Submit a manuscript
  • ERS author centre

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • Podcasts
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Print ISSN:  0903-1936
Online ISSN: 1399-3003

Copyright © 2021 by the European Respiratory Society