Download PDF
Semin Respir Crit Care Med 2022; 43(06): 862-873
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1753476
Review Article

Imaging of Lung Cancer Staging

J. Matthew Archer
1   Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
,
Mylene T. Truong
2   Department of Thoracic Imaging, University of Texas Monroe Dunaway Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
,
Girish S. Shroff
2   Department of Thoracic Imaging, University of Texas Monroe Dunaway Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
,
Myrna C. B. Godoy
2   Department of Thoracic Imaging, University of Texas Monroe Dunaway Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
,
Edith M. Marom
3   Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Tel Aviv University, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Ramat Gan, Israel
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Lung cancer is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Imaging is integral in accurate clinical staging to stratify patients into groups to predict survival and determine treatment. The eighth edition of the tumor, node, and metastasis (TNM-8) staging system proposed by the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer in 2016, accepted by both the Union for International Cancer Control and the American Joint Committee on Cancer, is the current standard method of staging lung cancer. This single TNM staging is used for all histologic subtypes of lung cancer, including nonsmall cell lung cancer, small cell lung cancer, and bronchopulmonary carcinoid tumor, and it addresses both clinical and pathologic staging. Familiarity with the strengths and limitations of imaging modalities used in staging, the nuances of TNM-8, its correct nomenclature, and potential pitfalls are important to optimize patient care. In this article, we discuss the role of computed tomography (CT) and positron emission tomography/CT in lung cancer staging, as well as current imaging recommendations pertaining to TNM-8.

Keywords

lung cancer - staging - metastasis - TNM-8


Publication History

Article published online:
10 July 2022

© 2022. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 NCCN Guidelines. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer,. Version 3.2022. Accessed March 4, 2022 at: https://www.nccn.org/guidelines/guidelines-detail?category=1&id=1450
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Goldstraw P, Chansky K, Crowley J. et al; International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Staging and Prognostic Factors Committee, Advisory Boards, and Participating Institutions, International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Staging and Prognostic Factors Committee Advisory Boards and Participating Institutions. The IASLC lung cancer staging project: proposals for revision of the TNM stage groupings in the forthcoming (Eighth) edition of the TNM classification for lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2016; 11 (01) 39-51
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Nicholson AG, Chansky K, Crowley J. et al; Staging and Prognostic Factors Committee, Advisory Boards, and Participating Institutions, Staging and Prognostic Factors Committee Advisory Boards and Participating Institutions. The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Lung Cancer Staging Project: proposals for the revision of the clinical and pathologic staging of small cell lung cancer in the forthcoming eighth edition of the TNM classification for lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2016; 11 (03) 300-311
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Yoon JY, Sigel K, Martin J. et al. Evaluation of the prognostic significance of TNM staging guidelines in lung carcinoid tumors. J Thorac Oncol 2019; 14 (02) 184-192
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Travis WD, Asamura H, Bankier AA. et al; International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Staging and Prognostic Factors Committee and Advisory Board Members. The IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project: proposals for coding T categories for subsolid nodules and assessment of tumor size in part-solid tumors in the forthcoming eighth edition of the TNM classification of lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2016; 11 (08) 1204-1223
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Rami-Porta R, Bolejack V, Crowley J. et al; IASLC Staging and Prognostic Factors Committee, Advisory Boards and Participating Institutions. The IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project: proposals for the revisions of the T descriptors in the forthcoming eighth edition of the TNM classification for lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2015; 10 (07) 990-1003
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Carter BW, Lichtenberger III JP, Benveniste MK. et al. Revisions to the TNM staging of lung cancer: rationale, significance, and clinical application. Radiographics 2018; 38 (02) 374-391
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Purandare NC, Rangarajan V. Imaging of lung cancer: implications on staging and management. Indian J Radiol Imaging 2015; 25 (02) 109-120
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Greco C, Rosenzweig K, Cascini GL, Tamburrini O. Current status of PET/CT for tumour volume definition in radiotherapy treatment planning for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Lung Cancer 2007; 57 (02) 125-134
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Truong MT, Viswanathan C, Erasmus JJ. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography in lung cancer staging, prognosis, and assessment of therapeutic response. J Thorac Imaging 2011; 26 (02) 132-146
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Ichinose J, Kohno T, Fujimori S, Harano T, Suzuki S, Fujii T. Invasiveness and malignant potential of pulmonary lesions presenting as pure ground-glass opacities. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2014; 20 (05) 347-352
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Asamura H, Chansky K, Crowley J. et al; International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Staging and Prognostic Factors Committee, Advisory Board Members, and Participating Institutions. The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer Lung Cancer Staging Project: proposals for the revision of the N descriptors in the forthcoming 8th edition of the TNM classification for lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2015; 10 (12) 1675-1684
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Rusch VW, Asamura H, Watanabe H, Giroux DJ, Rami-Porta R, Goldstraw P. Members of IASLC Staging Committee. The IASLC lung cancer staging project: a proposal for a new international lymph node map in the forthcoming seventh edition of the TNM classification for lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2009; 4 (05) 568-577
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Daly ME, Singh N, Ismaila N, et al. Daly ME, Singh N, Ismaila N. et al. Management of stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: ASCO guideline. J Clin Oncol 2022; 40 (12) 1356-1384
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Silvestri GA, Gonzalez AV, Jantz MA. et al. Methods for staging non-small cell lung cancer: Diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines. Chest 2013; 143 (5, suppl): e211S-e250S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Glazer GM, Gross BH, Quint LE, Francis IR, Bookstein FL, Orringer MB. Normal mediastinal lymph nodes: number and size according to American Thoracic Society mapping. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1985; 144 (02) 261-265
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Dwamena BA, Sonnad SS, Angobaldo JO, Wahl RL. Metastases from non-small cell lung cancer: mediastinal staging in the 1990s–meta-analytic comparison of PET and CT. Radiology 1999; 213 (02) 530-536
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Gould MK, Kuschner WG, Rydzak CE. et al. Test performance of positron emission tomography and computed tomography for mediastinal staging in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2003; 139 (11) 879-892
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Webb WR, Gatsonis C, Zerhouni EA. et al. CT and MR imaging in staging non-small cell bronchogenic carcinoma: report of the Radiologic Diagnostic Oncology Group. Radiology 1991; 178 (03) 705-713
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Martini N, Heelan R, Westcott J. et al. Comparative merits of conventional, computed tomographic, and magnetic resonance imaging in assessing mediastinal involvement in surgically confirmed lung carcinoma. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1985; 90 (05) 639-648
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Klein JS, Webb WR. The radiologic staging of lung cancer. J Thorac Imaging 1991; 7 (01) 29-47
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Musset D, Grenier P, Carette MF. et al. Primary lung cancer staging: prospective comparative study of MR imaging with CT. Radiology 1986; 160 (03) 607-611
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Staples CA, Müller NL, Miller RR, Evans KG, Nelems B. Mediastinal nodes in bronchogenic carcinoma: comparison between CT and mediastinoscopy. Radiology 1988; 167 (02) 367-372
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Webb WR. MR imaging in the evaluation and staging of lung cancer. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 1988; 9 (01) 53-66
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Gdeedo A, Van Schil P, Corthouts B, Van Mieghem F, Van Meerbeeck J, Van Marck E. Prospective evaluation of computed tomography and mediastinoscopy in mediastinal lymph node staging. Eur Respir J 1997; 10 (07) 1547-1551
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 McLoud TC, Bourgouin PM, Greenberg RW. et al. Bronchogenic carcinoma: analysis of staging in the mediastinum with CT by correlative lymph node mapping and sampling. Radiology 1992; 182 (02) 319-323
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Kim HY, Yi CA, Lee KS. et al. Nodal metastasis in non-small cell lung cancer: accuracy of 3.0-T MR imaging. Radiology 2008; 246 (02) 596-604
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Yi CA, Shin KM, Lee KS. et al. Non-small cell lung cancer staging: efficacy comparison of integrated PET/CT versus 3.0-T whole-body MR imaging. Radiology 2008; 248 (02) 632-642
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Shen G, Lan Y, Zhang K, Ren P, Jia Z. Comparison of 18F-FDG PET/CT and DWI for detection of mediastinal nodal metastasis in non-small cell lung cancer: A meta-analysis. PLoS One 2017; 12 (03) e0173104
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Shen G, Hu S, Deng H, Kuang A. Performance of DWI in the nodal characterization and assessment of lung cancer: a meta-analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2016; 206 (02) 283-290
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Wang Y, Carter BW, Muse V, Digumarthy S, Shepard JA, Sharma A. Potential pitfall in the assessment of lung cancer with FDG-PET/CT: talc pleurodesis causes intrathoracic nodal FDG avidity. Lung Cancer Int 2013; 2013: 683582
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Toloza EM, Harpole L, McCrory DC. Noninvasive staging of non-small cell lung cancer: a review of the current evidence. Chest 2003; 123 (1, suppl): 137S-146S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Birim O, Kappetein AP, Stijnen T, Bogers AJ. Meta-analysis of positron emission tomographic and computed tomographic imaging in detecting mediastinal lymph node metastases in nonsmall cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 2005; 79 (01) 375-382
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Lardinois D, Weder W, Hany TF. et al. Staging of non-small-cell lung cancer with integrated positron-emission tomography and computed tomography. N Engl J Med 2003; 348 (25) 2500-2507
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Antoch G, Stattaus J, Nemat AT. et al. Non-small cell lung cancer: dual-modality PET/CT in preoperative staging. Radiology 2003; 229 (02) 526-533
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Wei S, Asamura H, Kawachi R, Sakurai H, Watanabe S. Which is the better prognostic factor for resected non-small cell lung cancer: the number of metastatic lymph nodes or the currently used nodal stage classification?. J Thorac Oncol 2011; 6 (02) 310-318
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Saji H, Tsuboi M, Shimada Y. et al. A proposal for combination of total number and anatomical location of involved lymph nodes for nodal classification in non-small cell lung cancer. Chest 2013; 143 (06) 1618-1625
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Eberhardt WE, Mitchell A, Crowley J. et al; International Association for Study of Lung Cancer Staging and Prognostic Factors Committee, Advisory Board Members, and Participating Institutions. The IASLC lung cancer staging project: proposals for the revision of the M descriptors in the forthcoming eighth edition of the TNM classification of lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol 2015; 10 (11) 1515-1522
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Wu Y, Li P, Zhang H. et al. Diagnostic value of fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography for the detection of metastases in non-small-cell lung cancer patients. Int J Cancer 2013; 132 (02) E37-E47
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Quint LE, Tummala S, Brisson LJ. et al. Distribution of distant metastases from newly diagnosed non-small cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 1996; 62 (01) 246-250
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Sharma R, Tripathi M, D'Souza M. et al. The importance of 18F-FDG PET/CT, CT and X-rays in detecting primary stage III A lung cancer and the incidence of extra thoracic metastases. Hell J Nucl Med 2009; 12 (01) 22-25
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Metser U, Miller E, Lerman H, Lievshitz G, Avital S, Even-Sapir E. 18F-FDG PET/CT in the evaluation of adrenal masses. J Nucl Med 2006; 47 (01) 32-37
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Blake MA, Slattery JM, Kalra MK. et al. Adrenal lesions: characterization with fused PET/CT image in patients with proved or suspected malignancy–initial experience. Radiology 2006; 238 (03) 970-977
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Boland GW, Dwamena BA, Jagtiani Sangwaiya M. et al. Characterization of adrenal masses by using FDG PET: a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test performance. Radiology 2011; 259 (01) 117-126
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Ak I, Sivrikoz MC, Entok E, Vardareli E. Discordant findings in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: absolutely normal bone scans versus disseminated bone metastases on positron-emission tomography/computed tomography. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2010; 37 (04) 792-796
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Song JW, Oh YM, Shim TS, Kim WS, Ryu JS, Choi CM. Efficacy comparison between (18)F-FDG PET/CT and bone scintigraphy in detecting bony metastases of non-small-cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 2009; 65 (03) 333-338
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Diaz ME, Debowski M, Hukins C, Fielding D, Fong KM, Bettington CS. Non-small cell lung cancer brain metastasis screening in the era of positron emission tomography-CT staging: current practice and outcomes. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2018; 62 (03) 383-388
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Hendriks LE, Bootsma GP, de Ruysscher DK. et al. Screening for brain metastases in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer: Is there additive value of magnetic resonance imaging above a contrast-enhanced computed tomography of the brain?. Lung Cancer 2013; 80 (03) 293-297
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Hochstenbag MM, Twijnstra A, Hofman P, Wouters EF, ten Velde GP. MR-imaging of the brain of neurologic asymptomatic patients with large cell or adenocarcinoma of the lung. Does it influence prognosis and treatment?. Lung Cancer 2003; 42 (02) 189-193
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Lardinois D, Weder W, Roudas M. et al. Etiology of solitary extrapulmonary positron emission tomography and computed tomography findings in patients with lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23 (28) 6846-6853
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Sonoda A, Jeudy J, White CS. et al. Pleurodesis: indications and radiologic appearance. Jpn J Radiol 2015; 33 (05) 241-245
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Maziak DE, Darling GE, Inculet RI. et al. Positron emission tomography in staging early lung cancer: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151 (04) 221-228 , W-48
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Fischer B, Lassen U, Mortensen J. et al. Preoperative staging of lung cancer with combined PET-CT. N Engl J Med 2009; 361 (01) 32-39
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Kayani I, Conry BG, Groves AM. et al. A comparison of 68Ga-DOTATATE and 18F-FDG PET/CT in pulmonary neuroendocrine tumors. J Nucl Med 2009; 50 (12) 1927-1932
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar