Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Mutations in Japanese Men with Lung Adenocarcinomas

  • Tomita, Masaki (Department of Surgery II, Faculty of Medicine, University of Miyazaki) ;
  • Ayabe, Takanori (Department of Surgery II, Faculty of Medicine, University of Miyazaki) ;
  • Chosa, Eiichi (Department of Surgery II, Faculty of Medicine, University of Miyazaki) ;
  • Kawagoe, Katsuya (Department of Surgery II, Faculty of Medicine, University of Miyazaki) ;
  • Nakamura, Kunihide (Department of Surgery II, Faculty of Medicine, University of Miyazaki)
  • Published : 2015.01.22


Background: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations play a vital role in the prognosis of patients with lung adenocarcinoma. Such somatic mutations are more common in women who are non-smokers with adenocarcinoma and are of Asian origin. However, to our knowledge, there are few studies that have focused on men. Materials and Methods: One hundred and eighty-four consecutive patients (90 men and 94 women) of resected lung adenocarcinoma were studied retrospectively. Results: EGFR mutations were positive in 48.9% and negative (wild type) in 51.1%. Overall mutation was significant in women (66.0% vs. 32.2%) compared with men (p<0.001). For overall patients, EGFR mutation status was associated with gender, pStage, pT status, lepidic dominant histologic subtype, pure or mixed ground-glass nodule type on computed tomography and smoking status. However, in men, EGFR mutation status was only associated with lepidic dominant histologic subtype and not the other variables. Interestingly, the Brinkman index of men with mutant EGFR also did not differ from that for the wild type ($680.0{\pm}619.3$ vs. $813.1{\pm}552.1$ p=0.1077). Conclusions: The clinical characteristics of men with lung adenocarcinoma related to EGFR mutation are not always similar to that of overall patients. Especially we failed to find the relationship between EGFR mutations and smoking status in men.


  1. Ambrosini-Spaltro A, Ruiu A, Seebacher C, et al (2014). Impact of the IASLC/ATS/ERS classification in pN0 pulmonary adenocarcinomas: a study with radiological-pathological comparisons and survival analyses. Pathol Res Pract, 210, 40-6.
  2. Brinkman GL, Coates EO, Jr. (1963). The effect of bronchitis, smoking, and occupation on ventilation. Am Rev Respir Dis, 87, 684-93.
  3. D'Angelo SP, Pietanza MC, Johnson ML, et al (2011). Incidence of EGFR exon 19 deletions and L858R in tumor specimens from men and cigarette smokers with lung adenocarcinomas. J Clin Oncol, 29, 2066-70.
  4. Hsiao SH, Lin SE, Chou YT, et al (2014). Histological subtype and smoking status, but not gender, are associated with mutations in non-small-cell lung cancer. Mol Clin Oncol, 2, 252-8.
  5. Hsieh RK, Lim KH, Kuo HT, et al (2005). Female sex and bronchioloalveolar pathologic subtype predict EGFR mutations in non-small cell lung cancer. Chest, 128, 317-21.
  6. Kosaka T, Yatabe Y, Endoh H, et al (2004). Mutations of the epidermal growth factor receptor gene in lung cancer: biological and clinical implications. Cancer Res, 64, 8919-23.
  7. Lee HJ, Kim YT, Kang CH, et al (2013). Epidermal growth factor receptor mutation in lung adenocarcinomas: relationship with CT characteristics and histologic subtypes. Radiology, 268, 254-64.
  8. Luo RX, Wu B, Yi YN, et al (1996). Indoor burning coal air pollution and lung cancer--a case-control study in Fuzhou, China. Lung Cancer, 14, 113-9.
  9. Mitsudomi T, Kosaka T, Yatabe Y (2006). Biological and clinical implications of EGFR mutations in lung cancer. Int J Clin Oncol, 11, 190-8.
  10. Olayioye MA, Neve RM, Lane HA, et al (2000). The ErbB signaling network: receptor heterodimerization in development and cancer. EMBO J, 19, 3159-67.
  11. Pan Q, Pao W, Ladanyi M (2005). Rapid polymerase chain reaction-based detection of epidermal growth factor receptor gene mutations in lung adenocarcinomas. J Mol Diagn, 7, 396-403.
  12. Pinkas-Kramarski R, Soussan L, Waterman H, et al (1996). Diversification of Neu differentiation factor and epidermal growth factor signaling by combinatorial receptor interactions. Embo J, 15, 2452-67.
  13. Saeed HM, Alanazi MS, Nounou HA, et al (2013). Cytochrome P450 1A1, 2E1 and GSTM1 gene polymorphisms and susceptibility to colorectal cancer in the Saudi population. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 14, 3761-8.
  14. Shigematsu H, Lin L, Takahashi T, et al (2005). Clinical and biological features associated with epidermal growth factor receptor gene mutations in lung cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst, 97, 339-46.
  15. Shriver SP, Bourdeau HA, Gubish CT, et al (2000). Sex-specific expression of gastrin-releasing peptide receptor: relationship to smoking history and risk of lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst, 92, 24-33.
  16. Shukla RK, Tilak AR, Kumar C, et al (2013). Associations of CYP1A1, GSTM1 and GSTT1 polymorphisms with lung cancer susceptibility in a Northern Indian population. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 14, 3345-9.
  17. SiEGFRied JM (2001). Women and lung cancer: does oestrogen play a role? Lancet Oncol, 2, 506-13.
  18. Tanaka T, Matsuoka M, Sutani A, et al (2010). Frequency of and variables associated with the EGFR mutation and its subtypes. Int J Cancer, 126, 651-5.
  19. Travis WD, Brambilla E, Noguchi M, et al (2011). International association for the study of lung cancer/american thoracic society/european respiratory society international multidisciplinary classification of lung adenocarcinoma. J Thorac Oncol, 6, 244-85.
  20. Usuda K, Sagawa M, Motono N, et al (2014). Relationships between EGFR mutation status of lung cancer and preoperative factors - are they predictive? Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 15, 657-62.
  21. Yano M, Sasaki H, Kobayashi Y, et al (2006). Epidermal growth factor receptor gene mutation and computed tomographic findings in peripheral pulmonary adenocarcinoma. J Thorac Oncol, 1, 413-6.
  22. Yatabe Y, Hida T, Horio Y, et al (2006). A rapid, sensitive assay to detect EGFR mutation in small biopsy specimens from lung cancer. J Mol Diagn, 8, 335-41.

Cited by

  1. Predicting EGFR mutation status in lung cancer:Proposal for a scoring model using imaging and demographic characteristics vol.26, pp.11, 2016,