Background: Distinction of small cell lung carcinoma (SCLC) from non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) is critical because of the differences in prognosis and management. Patients with SCLC usually present with distant metastasis, and clinicians demand an accurate diagnosis in order to initiate appropriate therapy. Limited cytology material, occasionally with crush artifact, is not uncommon. Therefore, robust cytomorphologic features and a small immunostaining panel would be ideal to differentiate SCLC from NSCLC and other neuroendocrine neoplasms. We evaluated CD56 and the quantitative Ki-67 immunohistochemical panel in comparison to synaptophysin and chromogranin, along with cytomorphology to diagnose SCLC. Design: Eighty-eight cases of SCLC were retrieved from the cytology archives of The Johns Hopkins Hospital. Forty neuroendocrine neoplasms were used as control cases. Results: SCLCs included 33 lung cases and 55 metastatic lesions. The specimens were obtained by fine needle aspiration, thoracocentesis, bronchoalveolar lavage and abdominal paracentesis. CD56 was expressed in 98.9% of SCLCs, which is significantly more sensitive than synaptophysin and chromogranin. The Ki-67 labeling index was high (>70%) in all cases, which is a reliable marker to differentiate SCLC from other neuroendocrine neoplasms and NSCLC. Conclusion: CD56 and quantitative Ki-67 along with cytomorphology is a robust immunohistochemical panel to differentiate SCLC from other neuroendocrine neoplasms and NSCLC.

Keywords:
Fine needle aspiration, Small cell carcinoma, CD56, Ki-67, Pulmonary neuroendocrine neoplasms
1.
William D, Travis EB, Müller-Hermelink HK, et al: World Health Organization Classification of Tumours, Pathology and Genetics, Tumours of the Lung, Pleura, Thymus and Heart. Lyon, IARC Press, 2004.
2.
Travis WD, Rush W, Flieder DB, Falk R, Fleming MV, Gal AA, Koss MN: Survival analysis of 200 pulmonary neuroendocrine tumors with clarification of criteria for atypical carcinoid and its separation from typical carcinoid. Am J Surg Pathol 1998;22:934-944.
3.
Friedberg JS, Kaiser LR: Epidemiology of lung cancer. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1997;9:56-59.
4.
Gustafsson BI, Kidd M, Chan A, Malferthei-ner MV, Modlin IM: Bronchopulmonary neuroendocrine tumors. Cancer 2008;113: 5-21.
5.
Sturgis CD, Nassar DL, D'Antonio JA, Raab SS: Cytologic features useful for distinguishing small cell from non-small cell carcinoma in bronchial brush and wash specimens. Am J Clin Pathol 2000;114:197-202.
6.
Vazquez MF, Koizumi JH, Henschke CI, Yankelevitz DF: Reliability of cytologic diagnosis of early lung cancer. Cancer 2007;111:252-258.
7.
Samson DJ, Seidenfeld J, Simon GR, Turrisi AT 3rd, Bonnell C, Ziegler KM, Aronson N: Evidence for management of small cell lung cancer: ACCP evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (2nd edition). Chest 2007;132(suppl 3):S314-S323.
8.
Merrill RM, Henson DE, Barnes M: Conditional survival among patients with carcinoma of the lung. Chest 1999;116:697-703.
9.
Kawase A, Nagai K: Treatment strategy for neuroendocrine carcinoma of the lung. Gan To Kagaku Ryoho 2009;36:1619-1622.
10.
Sridhar KS, Hussein AM, Thurer RJ: Evolving role of surgical treatment in limited-disease small cell lung carcinoma. J Surg Oncol 1989;40:155-161.
11.
Wang JC, Sone S, Feng L, Yang ZG, Takashima S, Maruyama Y, Hasegawa M, Kawakami S, Honda T, Yamanda T: Rapidly growing small peripheral lung cancers detected by screening CT: correlation between radiological appearance and pathological features. Br J Radiol 2000;73:930-937.
12.
Pelosi G, Rodriguez J, Viale G, Rosai J: Typical and atypical pulmonary carcinoid tumor overdiagnosed as small-cell carcinoma on biopsy specimens: a major pitfall in the management of lung cancer patients. Am J Surg Pathol 2005;29:179-187.
13.
Sone S, Li F, Yang ZG, Takashima S, Maruyama Y, Hasegawa M, Wang JC, Kawakami S, Honda T: Characteristics of small lung cancers invisible on conventional chest radiography and detected by population based screening using spiral CT. Br J Radiol 2000;73:137-145.
14.
Thomas CF Jr, Tazelaar HD, Jett JR: Typical and atypical pulmonary carcinoids: outcome in patients presenting with regional lymph node involvement. Chest 2001;119:1143-1150.
15.
Beasley MB, Thunnissen FB, Brambilla E, Hasleton P, Steele R, Hammar SP, Colby TV, Sheppard M, Shimosato Y, Koss MN, et al: Pulmonary atypical carcinoid: predictors of survival in 106 cases. Hum Pathol 2000;31:1255-1265.
16.
DeMay RM: The Art and Science of Cytopathology, Aspiration Cytology. Chicago, ASCP Press, 1996.
17.
Atkinson BF: Atlas of Diagnostic Cytopathology. Philadelphia, Saunders, 2004.
18.
Yesner R: Heterogeneity of so-called neuroendocrine lung tumors. Exp Mol Pathol 2001;70:179-182.
19.
Aslan DL, Gulbahce HE, Pambuccian SE, Manivel JC, Jessurun J: Ki-67 immunoreactivity in the differential diagnosis of pulmonary neuroendocrine neoplasms in specimens with extensive crush artifact. Am J Clin Pathol 2005;123:874-878.
20.
Bynhardt R, Komaki R, Ettinger D, Johnstone D, Bradley J, Franko A, Gaspar L, Gillin M, Langer C, Layne E, et al: Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. Research Plan 2002-2006. Lung Cancer Committee. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001;51(suppl 2):44-52.
21.
Lyda MH, Weiss LM: Immunoreactivity for epithelial and neuroendocrine antibodies are useful in the differential diagnosis of lung carcinomas. Hum Pathol 2000;31:980-987.
22.
Howe MC, Chapman A, Kerr K, Dougal M, Anderson H, Hasleton PS: Neuroendocrine differentiation in non-small cell lung cancer and its relation to prognosis and therapy. Histopathology 2005;46:195-201.
23.
Kontogianni K, Nicholson AG, Butcher D, Sheppard MN: CD56: a useful tool for the diagnosis of small cell lung carcinomas on biopsies with extensive crush artefact. J Clin Pathol 2005;58:978-980.
24.
Lin O, Olgac S, Green I, Zakowski MF, Klimstra DS: Immunohistochemical staining of cytologic smears with MIB-1 helps distinguish low-grade from high-grade neuroendocrine neoplasms. Am J Clin Pathol 2003;120:209-216.
25.
Skov BG, Holm B, Erreboe A, Skov T, Mellemgaard A: ERCC1 and Ki67 in small cell lung carcinoma and other neuroendocrine tumors of the lung: distribution and impact on survival. J Thorac Oncol 2010;5:453-459.
26.
Rosai J: Rosai and Ackerman's Surgical Pathology. London, Mosby, 2004.
27.
Maleki Z: Diagnostic issues with cytopathologic interpretation of lung neoplasms displaying high-grade basaloid or neuroendocrine morphology. Diagn Cytopathol 2011;39:159-167.
28.
Hiroshima K, Iyoda A, Shida T, Shibuya K, Iizasa T, Kishi H, Tanizawa T, Fujisawa T, Nakatani Y: Distinction of pulmonary large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma from small cell lung carcinoma: a morphological, immunohistochemical, and molecular analysis. Mod Pathol 2006;19:1358-1368.
29.
Arora VK, Singh N, Chaturvedi S, Bhatia A: Significance of cytologic criteria in distinguishing small cell from non-small cell carcinoma of the lung. Acta Cytol 2003;47:216-220.
30.
Agoff SN, Lamps LW, Philip AT, Amin MB, Schmidt RA, True LD, Folpe AL: Thyroid transcription factor-1 is expressed in extrapulmonary small cell carcinomas but not in other extrapulmonary neuroendocrine tumors. Mod Pathol 2000;13:238-242.
31.
Ordonez NG: Value of thyroid transcription factor-1 immunostaining in distinguishing small cell lung carcinomas from other small cell carcinomas. Am J Surg Pathol 2000;24:1217-1223.
32.
Rossi G, Marchioni A, Milani M, Scotti R, Foroni M, Cesinaro A, Longo L, Migaldi M, Cavazza A: TTF-1, cytokeratin 7, 34betaE12, and CD56/NCAM immunostaining in the subclassification of large cell carcinomas of the lung. Am J Clin Pathol 2004;122:884-893.
33.
Gosney JR, Gosney MA, Lye M, Butt SA: Reliability of commercially available immunocytochemical markers for identification of neuroendocrine differentiation in bronchoscopic biopsies of bronchial carcinoma. Thorax 1995;50:116-120.
34.
Del Rio M, Demoly P, Koros AM, Laurent J, Mani J, Pau B, Pujol J: JLP5B9: new monoclonal antibody against polysialylated neural cell adhesion molecule is of value in phenotyping lung cancer. J Immunol Methods 2000;233:21-31.
35.
Yun JP, Xiang J, Hou JH, Tian QH, Fu J: Expression of CD56, as a potential diagnostic marker, in small cell carcinoma. Ai Zheng 2005;24:1140-1143.
36.
Kaufmann O, Georgi T, Dietel M: Utility of 123C3 monoclonal antibody against CD56 (NCAM) for the diagnosis of small cell carcinomas on paraffin sections. Hum Pathol 1997;28:1373-1378.
38.
Rekhtman N: Neuroendocrine tumors of the lung: an update. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2010;134:1628-1638.
39.
NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines). Neuroendocrine Tumors, Version 1.2012. 2012. www.NCCN.org.
40.
Rindi G, Kloppel G, Alhman H, Caplin M, Couvelard A, de Herder WW, Erikssson B, Falchetti A, Falconi M, Komminoth P, et al: TNM staging of foregut (neuro)endocrine tumors: a consensus proposal including a grading system. Virchows Arch 2006;449:395-401.
41.
Rindi G, Kloppel G, Couvelard A, Komminoth P, Korner M, Lopes JM, McNicol AM, Nilsson O, Perren A, Scarpa A, et al: TNM staging of midgut and hindgut (neuro) endocrine tumors: a consensus proposal including a grading system. Virchows Arch 2007;451:757-762.
42.
Ekeblad S, Skogseid B, Dunder K, Oberg K, Eriksson B: Prognostic factors and survival in 324 patients with pancreatic endocrine tumor treated at a single institution. Clin Cancer Res 2008;14:7798-7803.
43.
Zahel T, Krysa S, Herpel E, Stenzinger A, Goeppert B, Schirmacher P, Hoffmann H, Schnabel PA, Warth A: Phenotyping of pulmonary carcinoids and a Ki-67-based grading approach. Virchows Arch 2010;460:299-308.
© 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel
2013
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.