[Non small cell lung cancer - comparison between clinical and pathological staging]

Lung cancer (LC) staging remains a clinical challenge as it determines the disease's prognosis and treatment. Surgery is the best option for controlling non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and the only potential cure. In this setting, lung cancer staging helps select patients who will benefit from surgery, excluding inoperable patients and including patients with resectable lesions. The aim of this study is to compare clinical staging (TNMc) with pathological staging (TNMp) and to evaluate diagnosis, complementary treatment and survival of these patients. This is a retrospective study that included patients with non-small cell lung cancer or with highly suspicious lesions who had undergone surgery and were followed up in the Hospital de São João lung cancer unit between January 1999 and December 2003. It is based on clinical files and pathology reports. 73.3% of this group of 60 patients were male, with median age 59.2 years. The most frequent TNMc stages were 41.7% T1N0M0 and 36.7% T2N0M0. Thoracotomy for therapeutic purpose was per- formed in 80% and thoracotomy for diagnostic purpose also in the remaining 20%. In 6.7% the resection was incomplete. The most frequent TNMp stages were T2N0p in 33.3%, T2N1p in 15.0% and T2N2p in 13.3%. There was a significant difference between the two staging types, with upstaging in 65.0%, down staging in 67% and only 28.3% keeping the same stage. The most frequent differences were from T1N0c to T2N0p and from T2N0c to T2N1p. The global agreement between both staging methods was 21.7%. Median global survival was 43 months. In conclusion, while clinical staging was less accurate, it did not determine important changes in therapeutic strategy and survival. For the future, we should consider using other diagnostic tools and other biological factors to complement the anatomical information that we currently use.