The IASLC Staging and Prognostic Factors Committee has collected a new database of 94,708 cases donated from 35 sources in 16 countries around the globe. This has now been analysed by our statistical partners at Cancer Research And Biostatistics and, in close collaboration with the members of the committee proposals have been developed for the T, N, and M categories of the 8th edition of the TNM Classification for lung cancer due to be published late 2016. In this publication we describe the methods used to evaluate the resultant Stage groupings and the proposals put forward for the 8th edition.

No abstract

BACKGROUNDAlthough the histologic classification of thymic epithelial tumors has been confusing and controversial, an agreement on the universal classification system for thymic epithelial tumors was achieved by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 1999. The authors previously reported that the WHO histologic classification system reflects invasiveness and immunologic function of thymic epithelial tumors. In this subsequent study, they examined the prognostic significance of this classification system.METHODSClinical features as well as postoperative survival of patients with thymoma, but not thymic carcinoma, were examined with reference to WHO histologic classification based on an experience with 273 patients over a 44‐year period.RESULTSThere were 18 type A tumors, 77 type AB tumors, 55 type B1 tumors, 97 type B2 tumors, and 26 type B3 tumors. In patients with type A, AB, B1, B2, and B3 tumors, the respective proportions of invasive tumor were 11.1%, 41.6%, 47.3%, 69.1%, and 84.6%; the respective proportions of tumors with involvement of the great vessels were 0%, 3.9%, 7.3%, 17.5%, and 19.2%; and the respective 20‐year survival rates were 100%, 87%, 91%, 59%, and 36%. According to the Masaoka staging system, the 20‐year survival rates were 89%, 91%, 49%, 0%, and 0% in patients with Stage I, II, III, IVa, and IVb disease, respectively. By multivariate analysis, the Masaoka staging system and the WHO histologic classification system were significant independent prognostic factors, whereas age, gender, association with myasthenia gravis, completeness of resection, or involvement of the great vessels were not significant independent prognostic factors.CONCLUSIONSThis study showed that histologic appearance reflects the oncologic behavior of thymoma when the WHO classification system is adopted. The WHO classification system may be helpful in clinical practice for the assessment and treatment of patients with thymoma. Cancer 2002;94:624–32. © 2002 American Cancer Society.DOI 10.1002/cncr.10225

This article proposes codes for the primary tumor categories of adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS) and minimally invasive adenocarcinoma (MIA) and a uniform way to measure tumor size in part-solid tumors for the eighth edition of the tumor, node, and metastasis classification of lung cancer. In 2011, new entities of AIS, MIA, and lepidic predominant adenocarcinoma were defined, and they were later incorporated into the 2015 World Health Organization classification of lung cancer. To fit these entities into the T component of the staging system, the Tis category is proposed for AIS, with Tis (AIS) specified if it is to be distinguished from squamous cell carcinoma in situ (SCIS), which is to be designated Tis (SCIS). We also propose that MIA be classified as T1mi. Furthermore, the use of the invasive size for T descriptor size follows a recommendation made in three editions of the Union for International Cancer Control tumor, node, and metastasis supplement since 2003. For tumor size, the greatest dimension should be reported both clinically and pathologically. In nonmucinous lung adenocarcinomas, the computed tomography (CT) findings of ground glass versus solid opacities tend to correspond respectively to lepidic versus invasive patterns seen pathologically. However, this correlation is not absolute; so when CT features suggest nonmucinous AIS, MIA, and lepidic predominant adenocarcinoma, the suspected diagnosis and clinical staging should be regarded as a preliminary assessment that is subject to revision after pathologic evaluation of resected specimens. The ability to predict invasive versus noninvasive size on the basis of solid versus ground glass components is not applicable to mucinous AIS, MIA, or invasive mucinous adenocarcinomas because they generally show solid nodules or consolidation on CT.