4.4 Article

The position of pulmonary carcinoids within the spectrum of neuroendocrine tumors of the lung and other tissues

Journal

GENES CHROMOSOMES & CANCER
Volume 34, Issue 1, Pages 78-85

Publisher

WILEY-LISS
DOI: 10.1002/gcc.10049

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Bronchopulmonary carcinoids comprise 25% of all human carcinoids. The World Health Organization divides them into typical (TC) and atypical forms (ATC), distinguished by differences in mitotic counts lower or higher than 2/2 mm(2) and the presence or absence of necrosis. The reproducibility of this classification with respect to the borderline cases with 1-2 mitotic counts/2 mm(2) has been questioned. We have analyzed 15 TCs and 20 ATCs by comparative genomic hybridization. Loss of 11q was the most frequent aberration in ATC (55%), but was observed only twice in TC (13%). Deletions of 3p were seen only in ATC (25%). Meta-analysis of our data and data from 218 neuroenclocrine tumors and 50 non-small-cell lung carcinomas obtained from the literature revealed differences between carcinoids and carcinomas. For example, loss of 5q is frequent in lung carcinomas (75%) but is rarely seen in carcinoids (1.4%). Deletions of 11q are less frequent in neuroenclocrine lung carcinomas than in ATC. To obtain a more objective survey of the relationship of pulmonary carcinolds to other neuroenclocrine tumors and lung carcinomas, we created a hierarchical clustering dendrogram. This statistical approach resulted in a clear separation of carcinolds and carcinomas, which both built up different clusters. In summary, this study demonstrates the benefit of chromosomal analysis supplementary to the diagnosis of bronchopulmonary carcinoids. We also identified the feasibility of hierarchical clustering to get some clues on relationship between different tumor types, This study further argues against a transition of ATC to high-grade neuroenclocrine lung carcinoma. (C) 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available