P3.01-029 Cases Demonstrating Spread Through Air Spaces (STAS) Reflects Invasive Growth and Not an Artifact: Topic: Morphology

Shaohua Lu,Natasha Rekhtman,Takashi Eguchi,David Jones,Prasad Adusumilli,William Travisi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtho.2016.11.1595

IF: 20.121

2017-01-01

Journal of Thoracic Oncology

Abstract:STAS is defined as a pattern of tumor cell spread in the lung parenchyma beyond the edge of a lung cancer. It has been postulated that this is an ex vivo artifact due to the force of knife with the premise that STAS is clinically unimportant and it should be ignored like true artifacts. We present three cases providing evidence that STAS is not an artifact and is clinically relevant. Case 1: 68F underwent wedge resection of a left upper lobe (LUL) lung adenocarcinoma. During the surgical procedure the surgeon did not cut across the tumor, but sent a separate wedge biopsy as an additional margin. The latter wedge contained an 8 mm focus of adenocarcinoma consisting almost entirely of a STAS pattern with a 1mm area of acinar growth. Case 2: 66M underwent RUL wedge resection in August 2013 for a 1.3 cm lung adenocarcinoma. The resection margin was positive with only STAS in the margin. In the absence of any clinical sign of recurrence or metastases, a completion right upper lobectomy was performed revealing three separate foci of residual adenocarcinoma including 1.5 and 1.0 mm acinar areas and a 0.5 mm focus of STAS with N1 and N2 lymph node metastases. Adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation were given. In 2014, the patient developed multiple bilateral nodules and in November underwent LUL wedge resection that showed three foci of adenocarcinoma with a STAS predominant pattern. In July 2016, the patient remains on chemotherapy with slowly growing bilateral nodules. Case 3: A 77M presented with pneumonia and bilateral ground glass opacities with focal consolidation. A biopsy, originally interpreted as benign, showed diffuse involvement by adenocarcinoma with a STAS predominant pattern. The morphology does not explain the consolidation seen on CT indicating the surgeon did not cut across the main tumor area. We present three cases which provide evidence that STAS is not an artifact that should be ignored. In two cases the extensive STAS predominant pattern was not a knife cutting artifact because the main tumor was not cut either by the surgeon or pathologist. In the third case, STAS was the only pattern of tumor identified at a wedge resection margin. If this had been ignored, the residual and metastatic tumor would not have been identified delaying introduction of chemotherapy. These findings support the concept that STAS is a clinically important invasive pattern and not an artifact.