Independent bilateral primary bronchial carcinomas

Bilateral Hilar Enlargement as a Presenting Sign of Multiple Primary Bronchogenic Carcinoma

“…Other authors feel that bilaterality is of less importance unless one of the tumors arises in the mucosa [6,7], In our patient, each tumor arose endobronchially from a sepa rate lung. The frequency of multiple lung cancers in several large autopsy series is be tween 0.2 and 1.8°/o [8,9]. Auerbach et al [10] found an incidence of 9%> of second 'microscopically' invasive carcinoma in the contralateral lung of patients undergoing surgery for bronchogenic carcinoma.…”

Multiple primary bronchogenic carcinomas, with a review of the literature

“…The divergent criteria used in diagnosing these lesions alone may contribute significantly to the varying incidence. The earliest definition of true multi- [7] suggest that in order to make diagnosis of second tumor, the histology must be different. At present, the general agreement is that, 1) the tumors should be geographically separated.…”

Second primary lung carcinoma.

“…Possible ambiguities in the time interval actually being described and also in the pathology of the second lesion must be accepted in reports of long time intervals. Brock (1964) reported 15 years between right lower and left upper lobectomy for primary tumours; Cliffton, Das Gupta, and Pool (1964) 13 years between left lower lobectomy and wedge resection of the right upper lobe; Watson (1965) fresh carcinoma in 6 of 56 patients surviving resection by more than 10 years; Belcher and Anderson (1965) two patients with fresh lesions 10 and 12 years after resection; le Roux (1968) six patients surviving 9 to 12 years after pneumonectomy with fresh carcinoma; Struve-Christensen (1971) one second primary at 10 years; Chaudhuri (1971) three second primaries at 13, 11, and 10 years after resection; Shields and Robinette (1973) eight second primaries diagnosed after the tenth year from a total of 41 post-resection second primaries; and Razzuk et al (1974) second primaries at 15, 14, 12, 12, and 10 years after resection from a total of 29 patients with multiple primary carcinoma.…”

“…Auerbach et al (1967) described the difficulty in confirming independent primary lesions at necropsy. In Chaudhuri's (1971) view, a fresh lesion can be established as a second primary carcinoma only if the histopathological features of the original and new carcinomas are different. Struve-Christensen (1971) emphasizes the importance of clinical factors in differentiating a metastasis from a second primary.…”