Jump to content

Question? Anyone?


Recommended Posts

Can someone tell me what sentence #2 and #4 mean. I copied this the other night from a reputable source on the internet, but unfortunately didnt copy he web address

"A wide variety of neoplasms may arise in the lungs. While many

lung tumours are overtly malignant and others are definitely benign, some fall both histologically and in their clinical behaviour between these two extremes. Pulmonary tumours may be classified histologically or according to their presumed tissue of origin. However, it should be borne in mind that histopathologists do not always agree on the classification of an individual tumour. Carcinoma of the bronchus is by far the commonest and most important primary tumour of the lung. "

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I am going to try.

Remember, this is all shades of gray and not black and white.

Overtly -- blatantly cancerous, in terms of the slide of the cells stained to see the cell and contents clearly. There is a range of differences from normal, to malignant and to benign. The medical dictionary describes malignant as " in reference to a neoplasm (new growth), having the property of locally invasive and destructive growth and metastasis. Or tending to become worse and leading to an ingravescent (increasing in severity) course". Some are NOT invasive or destructive, but cqn still get very large and throw mets like crazy. Some don't throw mets, but chew right through whatever is in its way, like mine did with my ribs.

Histopathologists don't always agree because they are taught to recognize the way normal should look, and malignant, and benign, and lots of in the middle stages. Each tumor, while needing to be classified for purpose of treatment and course of action, is like a person or fingerprint -- very individual. So there are two ways to look at the first sentence. One, in appearance , a single point in time, some hall marks of cancer are present but perhaps not so pronounced, or looking a little like two different types of malignancies , that is, having features of both. The other way is to look at change over time -- how aggressive it is, and that's where comparing scans comes in. Now mind there are a number of different kinds of cancers of the lung, plus mets from other kinds of tissues often form there, and the histologists are supposed to be able to tell which one and why based on meeting a list of (to us) arcane criteria of descriptions of visible shapes and stain uptakes and other things.

It is not as straightforward as say, rocket science.

Sorry this was kinda long. Hope I helped rather than muddled your mind.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.