Background: With the emergence of improved treatment strategies for patients with malignant lung tumors, it has become increasingly important to adequately diagnose and subclassify lung lesions. In our large retrospective study, we assessed the utility of fine-needle aspiration (FNA) in the diagnosis of primary and metastatic tumors to the lung. Methods: A computerized search of our laboratory informatics system was performed to identify cases from FNA of the lung and FNA of metastatic lung cancers to other sites. All of the corresponding surgical pathology reports were also reviewed. All of the cases were categorized as atypical (A), benign (B), malignant (M), nondiagnostic (ND), or suspicious (S) for data analysis purposes. Results: A total of 1,032 FNA cases were categorized as follows: 34 (3.3%) A, 142 (13.8%) B, 717 (69.5%) M, 121 (11.7%) ND, and 18 (1.7%) S. Of the 717 cases of malignant FNA, a specific tumor type was able to be rendered on cytomorphology alone or with the help of immunostains in 99% as follows: adenocarcinoma (296 cases, 41%), squamous cell carcinoma (158 cases, 22%), metastatic tumors (123 cases, 17%), small cell carcinoma (56 cases, 8%), non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) (58 cases, 8%), neuroendocrine carcinoma (15 cases, 2%), and poorly differentiated carcinoma (4 cases, 1%). Out of all NSCLC cases, 89% were able to be subclassified as either adenocarcinoma or squamous carcinoma. The most frequent origins of metastatic tumors to the lung were renal cell carcinoma (n = 22), melanoma (n = 17), colon (n = 15), breast (n = 14), and urothelial carcinoma (n = 10). There was also metastasis from 18 other organs with fewer than 5 cases each. There were 333 correlated histologic specimens including 191 small biopsies and 142 resection specimens. Diagnostic sensitivity and specificity for malignancy were 96 and 100%, respectively. Diagnostic accuracy was 97%. Sampling error resulted in 8 false-negative cases on FNA. Conclusions: FNA is both sensitive and specific in the diagnosis and subclassification of both primary and metastatic lung tumors. Eighty-nine percent of NSCLC cases were able to be further subclassified as adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma by FNA.

1.
Brambilla E, Moro D, Veale D, et al: Basal cell (basaloid) carcinoma of the lung: a new morphologic and phenotypic entity with separate prognostic significance. Hum Pathol 1992;23:993–1003.
2.
Molina JR, Yang P, Cassivi SD, Schild SE, Adjei AA: Non-small cell lung cancer: epidemiology, risk factors, treatment, and survivorship. Mayo Clin Proc 2008;83:584–594.
3.
Youlden DR, Cramb SM, Baade PD: The international epidemiology of lung cancer: geographical distribution and secular trends. J Thorac Oncol 2008;3:819–831.
4.
Beasley MB, Brambilla E, Travis WD: The 2004 World Health Organization classification of lung tumors. Semin Roentgenol 2005;40:90–97.
5.
Ginsberg MS, Grewal RK, Heelan RT: Lung cancer. Radiol Clin North Am 2007;45:21–43.
6.
Novaes FT, Cataneo DC, Ruiz Junior RL, Defaveri J, Michelin OC, Cataneo AJ: Lung cancer: histology, staging, treatment and survival. J Bras Pneumol 2008;34:595–600.
7.
Edey AJ, Hansell DM: Incidentally detected small pulmonary nodules on CT. Clin Radiol 2009;64:872–884.
8.
Hirsch FR, Spreafico A, Novello S, Wood MD, Simms L, Papotti M: The prognostic and predictive role of histology in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a literature review. J Thorac Oncol 2008;3:1468–1481.
9.
Schiller JH, Harrington D, Belani CP, et al: Comparison of four chemotherapy regimens for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 2002;346:92–98.
10.
Johnson DH, Fehrenbacher L, Novotny WF, et al: Randomized phase II trial comparing bevacizumab plus carboplatin and paclitaxel with carboplatin and paclitaxel alone in previously untreated locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:2184–2191.
11.
Scagliotti G, Hanna N, Fossella F, et al: The differential efficacy of pemetrexed according to NSCLC histology: a review of two phase III studies. Oncologist 2009;14:253–263.
12.
Langer CJ, Besse B, Gualberto A, Brambilla E, Soria JC: The evolving role of histology in the management of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:5311–5320.
13.
Hajdu SI, Melamed MR: Limitations of aspiration cytology in the diagnosis of primary neoplasms. Acta Cytologica 1984;28:337–345.
14.
Cagle PT, Kovach M, Ramzy I: Causes of false results in transthoracic fine needle lung aspirates. Acta Cytologica 1993;37:16–20.
15.
Arakawa H, Nakajima Y, Kurihara Y, Niimi H, Ishikawa T: CT-guided transthoracic needle biopsy: a comparison between automated biopsy gun and fine needle aspiration. Clin Radiol 1996;51:503–506.
16.
Kim HK, Shin BK, Cho SJ, et al: Transthoracic fine needle aspiration and core biopsy of pulmonary lesions: a study of 296 patients. Acta Cytologica 2002;46:1061–1068.
17.
Greif J, Marmur S, Schwarz Y, Man A, Staroselsky AN: Percutaneous core cutting needle biopsy compared with fine-needle aspiration in the diagnosis of peripheral lung malignant lesions: results in 156 patients. Cancer 1998;84:144–147.
18.
Boiselle PM, Shepard JA, Mark EJ, et al: Routine addition of an automated biopsy device to fine-needle aspiration of the lung: a prospective assessment. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997;169:661–666.
19.
Moulton JS, Moore PT: Coaxial percutaneous biopsy technique with automated biopsy devices: value in improving accuracy and negative predictive value. Radiology 1993;186:515–522.
20.
Laurent F, Latrabe V, Vergier B, Michel P: Percutaneous CT-guided biopsy of the lung: comparison between aspiration and automated cutting needles using a coaxial technique. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2000;23:266–272.
21.
Bocking A, Klose KC, Kyll HJ, Hauptmann S: Cytologic versus histologic evaluation of needle biopsy of the lung, hilum and mediastinum: sensitivity, specificity and typing accuracy. Acta Cytologica 1995;39:463–471.
22.
Khouri NF, Stitik FP, Erozan YS, et al: Transthoracic needle aspiration biopsy of benign and malignant lung lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1985;144:281–288.
23.
Thornbury JR, Burke DP, Naylor B: Transthoracic needle aspiration biopsy: accuracy of cytologic typing of malignant neoplasms. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1981;136:719–724.
24.
Conces DJ Jr, Schwenk GR Jr, Doering PR, Glant MD: Thoracic needle biopsy: improved results utilizing a team approach. Chest 1987;91:813–816.
25.
Austin JH, Cohen MB: Value of having a cytopathologist present during percutaneous fine-needle aspiration biopsy of lung: report of 55 cancer patients and metaanalysis of the literature. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1993;160:175–177.
26.
Johnston WW: Percutaneous fine needle aspiration biopsy of the lung: a study of 1,015 patients. Acta Cytologica 1984;28:218–224.
27.
Gong Y, Sneige N, Guo M, Hicks ME, Moran CA: Transthoracic fine-needle aspiration vs. concurrent core needle biopsy in diagnosis of intrathoracic lesions: a retrospective comparison of diagnostic accuracy. Am J Clin Pathol 2006;125:438–444.
28.
Crapanzano JS, Sagi A: Pulmonary cytopathology. Diagn Cytopathol 2011;39:144–154.
29.
Vazquez MF, Koizumi JH, Henschke CI, Yankelevitz DF: Reliability of cytologic diagnosis of early lung cancer. Cancer 2007;111:252–258.
30.
Socinski MA: The emerging role of biomarkers in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Clin Lung Cancer 2010;11:149–159.
31.
Sharma SV, Settleman J: ErbBs in lung cancer. Exp Cell Res 2009;315:557–571.
32.
Billah S, Stewart J, Staerkel G, Chen S, Gong Y, Guo M: EGFR and KRAS mutations in lung carcinoma: molecular testing by using cytology specimens. Cancer Cytopathol 2011;119:111–117.
33.
van Eijk R, Licht J, Schrumpf M, et al: Rapid KRAS, EGFR, BRAF and PIK3CA mutation analysis of fine needle aspirates from non-small-cell lung cancer using allele-specific qPCR. PLoS One 2011;6:e17791.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.