Does Immunohistochemistry Affect Response to Therapy and Survival of Inoperable Non–Small Cell Lung Carcinoma Patients? A Survey of 145 Stage III-IV Consecutive Cases

Abstract

Whether non–small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) unveiled by immunohistochemistry (IHC) has the same clinical outcome as those typed by morphology is still matter of debate. A total of 145 stage III-IV, consecutive inoperable NSCLC patients treated by chemotherapy (133 cases) or EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (12 cases) and including 100 biopsies, 11 surgical specimens, and 34 cytological samples had originally accounted for 120 adenocarcinomas (ADs), 19 squamous cell carcinomas (SQCs), and 6 adenosquamous carcinomas (ADSQCs) by integrating morphology and thyroid transcription factor-1 (TTF1)/p40 IHC. Thirty-two NSCLC–not otherwise specified (NSCLC-NOS) cases were identified by morphology revision of the original diagnoses, which showed solid growth pattern (P < .001), 22 ADs, 5 SQCs, and 5 ADSQCs by IHC profiling (P < .001), and 10 gene-altered tumors (3 EGFR, 5 KRAS, and 2 ALK). While no significant relationships were observed between response to therapy and original, morphology or IHC diagnoses, driver mutations and tumor differentiation by TTF1 expression, AD run better progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) than other tumor types by morphology (P = .010 and P = .047) and IHC (P = .033 and P = .046), respectively. Furthermore, patients with NSCLC-NOS confirmed as AD by IHC tended to have poorer OS (P = .179) and PFS (P = .193) similar to that of ADSQC and SQC (P = .702 and P = .540, respectively). A category of less differentiated AD with poorer prognosis on therapy could be identified by IHC, while there were no differences for SQC or ADSQC. The terminology of “NSCLC-NOS, favor by IHC” is appropriate to alert clinicians toward more aggressive tumors.