Computed tomography density is not associated with pathological tumor invasion for pure ground-glass nodules

Abstract

Objective

Pure ground-glass nodules are considered to be radiologically noninvasive in lung adenocarcinoma. However, some pure ground-glass nodules are found to be invasive adenocarcinoma pathologically. This study aims to identify the computed tomography parameters distinguishing invasive adenocarcinoma from adenocarcinoma in situ and minimally invasive adenocarcinoma.

Methods

From May 2011 to December 2015, patients with completely resected adenocarcinoma appearing as pure ground-glass nodules were reviewed. To evaluate the association between computed tomography features and the invasiveness of pure ground-glass nodules, logistic regression analyses were conducted.

Results

Among 432 enrolled patients, 118 (27.3%) were classified as adenocarcinoma in situ, 213 (49.3%) were classified as minimally invasive adenocarcinoma, 101 (23.4%) were classified as invasive adenocarcinoma. There was no postoperative recurrence for patients with pure ground-glass nodules. Logistic regression analyses demonstrated that computed tomography size was the only independent radiographic factor associated with adenocarcinoma in situ (odds ratio, 47.165; 95% confidence interval, 19.279-115.390; P < .001), whereas computed tomography density was not (odds ratio, 1.002; 95% confidence interval, 0.999-1.005; P = .127). Further analyses revealed that there was no distributional difference in computed tomography density among 3 groups (P = .173). Even after propensity score matching for adenocarcinoma in situ/minimally invasive adenocarcinoma and invasive adenocarcinoma, no significant difference in computed tomography density was observed (P = .741). The subanalyses for pure ground-glass nodules with 1 cm or more in size also indicated similar results.

Conclusions

In patients with pure ground-glass nodules, computed tomography size was the only radiographic parameter associated with tumor invasion. Measuring computed tomography density provided no advantage in differentiating invasive adenocarcinoma from adenocarcinoma in situ and minimally invasive adenocarcinoma.