Background
The prognostic analysis of lung invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma (IMA) is deficient due to the lack of a universally recommended histological grading system, leading to unregulated treatment approaches.
Objective
We aimed to examine the clinical trajectory of IMA and assess the viability of utilizing the existing grading system for lung invasive non-mucinous adenocarcinoma in the context of IMA.
Methods
We retrospectively collected clinicopathological data from 265 IMA patients. Each case re-evaluated the tumor grade using the following three classification systems: the 4th Edition of the World Health Organization classification system, the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) grading system, and a two-tier grading system. We performed a comparative analysis of these grading systems and identified the most effective grading system for IMA.
Results
The study comprised a total of 214 patients with pure IMA and 51 patients with mixed IMA. The 5-year overall survival (OS) rates for pure IMA and mixed IMA were 86.7% and 57.8%, respectively. All three grading systems proved to be effective prognostic classifiers for IMA. The value of area under the curve at 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS was highest for the IASLC grading system compared with the other grade systems and the clinical stage. The IASLC classification system was an independent prognostic predictor (p = 0.009, hazard ratio 2.243, 95% confidence interval 1.219–4.127).
Conclusion
Mixed IMA is more aggressive than pure IMA, with an OS rate on par with that of high-grade pure IMA. The IASLC grading system can better indicate prognosis and is recommended for lung IMA.
