Effects of a ground-glass opacity component on the recurrence and survival of pathological stage IA3 lung adenocarcinoma: a multi-institutional retrospective study

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of the presence of a radiographically manifested ground-glass opacity (GGO) component on the prognosis of patients with pathological stage IA3 lung adenocarcinoma.

Methods: Patients diagnosed with pathological stage IA3 lung adenocarcinoma who underwent radical surgery at two medical institutions in China between July 2012 and July 2020 were enrolled. The cumulative incidence of recurrence (CIR) and cumulative incidence of death (CID) in patients with and without a GGO component were compared. Risk curves for the recurrence and tumor-related death overtime were analyzed between the two groups according to life table. In order to validate the prognostic value of GGO components, the recurrence-free survival (RFS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were estimated. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was performed to evaluate the clinical benefit rate of different models.

Results: Among the 352 included patients, the presence of a GGO component was radiographically shown in 166 (47.2%) patients, while 186 (52.8%) displayed solid nodules. Patients exhibiting the absence of a GGO component had higher incidences of total recurrence (17.2% vs. 3.0%, P<0.001), local-regional recurrence (LRR) (5.4% vs. 0.6%, P=0.010), distant metastasis (DM) (8.1% vs. 1.8%, P=0.008), and multiple recurrences (4.3% vs. 0.6%, P=0.028) than the presence-GGO component group. The 5-year CIR and CID were 7.5% and 7.4% in the presence-GGO component group, and 24.5% and 17.0% in the absence-GGO component group, respectively, with statistically significant differences between the two groups (P<0.05). The risk of recurrence in patients with the presence of GGO components showed a single peak at 3 years postoperatively, while patients with the absence of GGO components showed a double peak at 1 and 5 years after surgery, respectively. However, the risk of tumor-related death peaked in both groups at 3 and 6 years postoperatively. Multivariate Cox analysis showed that the presence of a GGO component was a favorable independent risk factor for pathological stage IA3 lung adenocarcinoma patients (P<0.05).

Conclusions: Pathological stage IA3 lung adenocarcinoma with or without GGO components are two types of tumors with different invasive abilities. In clinical practice, we should develop different treatment and follow-up strategies.

Keywords: Pathological stage IA3 lung adenocarcinoma; ground-glass opacity component (GGO component); prognosis.

Figure 1

Typical radiological imaging findings of pathological IA3 stage lung adenocarcinoma. (A) CTR =0; (B) 0< CTR <0.25; (C) 0.25≤ CTR <0.5; (D) 0.5≤ CTR <0.75; (E) 0.75≤ CTR <1; (F) CTR =1. CTR, consolidation tumor ratio.

Figure 2

Cumulative occurrence of all patients (A, cumulative incidence of recurrence; C, cumulative incidence of death) and risk curves at 1-year intervals (B, recurrence risk; D, tumor-related death risk).

Figure 3

Recurrence patterns between the two groups. GGO, ground-glass opacity; LRR, local-regional recurrence; DM, distant metastasis.

Figure 4

Cumulative occurrence of all patients (A, cumulative incidence of recurrence; C, cumulative incidence of death) and risk curves at 1-year intervals (B, recurrence risk; D, tumor-related death risk) based on the presence or absence of GGO components. GGO, ground-glass opacity.

Figure 5

Comparison of RFS (A) and CSS (B) between the different prognosis score staging models. GGO, ground-glass opacity; RFS, recurrence-free survival; CSS, cancer-specific survival.

Figure 6

Decision curve analyses for the different models. (A) RFS; (B) CSS. MIP, micropapillary; GGO, ground-glass opacity; RFS, recurrence-free survival; CSS, cancer-specific survival.