Close
New

Medscape is available in 5 Language Editions – Choose your Edition here.

 

Metastatic Cancer With Unknown Primary Site Workup

  • Author: Winston W Tan, MD, FACP; Chief Editor: Wafik S El-Deiry, MD, PhD  more...
 
Updated: Apr 01, 2016
 

Approach Considerations

A minimal basic workup for cancer of unknown primary origin comprises basic blood and biochemical analyses along with computed tomography (CT) scans of the abdomen and pelvis.[7] Further investigations are dictated by any positive findings on initial evaluation. Depending on the clinical situation, these may include studies such as chest CT, breast magnetic resonance imaging, or upper or lower endoscopy. In suspected head and neck malignancies, panendoscopy of the upper aerodigestive pathways should be performed, with   blind biopsies of the lymphoid tissue in these areas. Diagnostic tonsillectomy may be warranted.

Intensive testing also adds to the morbidity for the weak and frail patient. A large negative cost-to-benefit ratio exists for an extensive unguided clinical evaluation, with one study quoting a 9.5% increase in 1-year survival at a cost of 2-8 million dollars.[8, 9, 10] When these investigations fail to reveal a potential primary lesion, a cancer of unknown primary origin is assumed. The goal of initial evaluation should be to detect the small subset of patients who warrant potentially curative management.

Next

Laboratory Studies

Lab studies for metastatic cancer with an unknown primary site should include the following:

  • Complete blood cell count (iron deficiency may point toward an occult gastrointestinal malignancy leading to chronic blood loss)
  • Urinalysis (microscopic hematuria may be a sign of occult genitourinary malignancy)
  • Liver and renal function tests
  • Stool examination for occult blood
  • Measurement of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) in men
Previous
Next

Imaging Studies

Imaging studies should include the following:

  • Chest radiograph
  • Computed tomography (CT) of abdomen and pelvis
  • Mammography in women

Positron emission tomography with 18F-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (18F-FDG-PET) is increasingly being used in the evaluation of metastatic malignancies.[11] This may be especially the case in suspected head and neck malignancies. However, this modality lacks specificity and may be useful only to identify promising sites for biopsy. Although promising, its high cost and false-positive rate of 20% limit its utility in cases of cancer of unknown primary origin. The combination of PET/CT may reduce the false-positive rate.[12]

Depending on the clinical situation, further imaging studies may include CT of the chest or breast magnetic resonance imaging.

The high level of inaccuracy of unguided radiographic studies raises the issue of cost effectiveness for intensive diagnostic workup of this disorder.

See the image below.

CT scan of neck with contrast. The arrows indicate CT scan of neck with contrast. The arrows indicate metastatic lymphadenopathy. Image courtesy of Head and Neck Cancer-Multidisciplinary Approach, Davidson, BJ.
Previous
Next

Other Tests

The role of tumor markers, such as alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), beta–human chorionic gonadotropin (beta-HCG), cancer antigen 125 (CA125), CA 27.29, CA 19.9, and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), to establish a specific primary site or to identify patients who respond to chemotherapy remains unclear and should probably be limited to cases in which a particular primary site is favored. Most tumor markers are nonspecific and cannot be used to establish definitive diagnoses.[13]

In a large prospective trial, molecular tumor profiling predicted a tissue of origin in the majority of patients with cancer of unknown primary (CUP). Patients who received assay-directed site-specific therapy had a median survival time of 12.5 months, which compares favorably with survival among patients treated with empiric CUP regimens. CUP patients who were predicted to have more responsive tumor types had longer survival than those with less responsive tumor types (14 vs 7 months).[14]

For those tumors in which there is difficulty in making a diagnosis, several commercially available tests for genomic abnormalities and potential help with the diagnosis have been made available. These are often expensive, but at times are very helpful in identifying the primary site of the tumor. These tests include Pathwork, Cancer type Id, and micro-R.

Genomic testing is becoming less expensive, and multiple tests have been claimed to be very effective in finding the primary site of the tumor. Additionally, test results are accompanied by listings of the therapeutic drugs available for the cancer and the therapies that are in clinical trials. All this information must be taken into consideration by the clinician, and the case should be managed on the basis of a thorough synthesis of the data provided and the clinical relevance of the results.

At this time, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) does not recommend gene signature profiling for tissue of origin for standard management of CUP. The NCCN advises that although these tests may offer diagnostic benefit, they do not necessarily provide clinical benefit.[15]

A 2013 technology assessment by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) on commercially available genetic tests reported that the accuracy of the tests is 85-88%, but their accuracy in CUP cases is not easily determined, because in most cases the actual tissue of origin is not identified. The assessment concluded that the available evidence was insufficient to determine whether these tests affect clinician decisions or alter patient survival, and recommended that future studies addressing the clinical value of these tests be carried out by groups who have no evident conflict of interest.[16]

In a study by Hainsworth et al, a 92-gene reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) cancer classification assay predicted the tissue of origin in 247 of 252 assays (98%). Of the 289 patients enrolled in the study, 12.5% had insufficient tissue for the assay and 10% of patients were not treatment candidates by the time the results became available.[17]

Previous
Next

Procedures

Often the diagnostic procedure of choice is a biopsy of the metastatic site and a careful evaluation of the pathology, which leads the clinician to a cost-effective diagnostic evaluation of the disease.

Depending on the clinical situation, upper or lower endoscopy may be warranted. In suspected head and neck malignancies, panendoscopy of the upper aerodigestive pathways should be performed, with blind biopsies of the lymphoid tissue in these areas, as indicated. Diagnostic tonsillectomy may be warranted.

Previous
Next

Histologic Findings

The pathologist has an indispensable role in the evaluation of cancer of unknown primary origin. The help of a pathologist familiar with cancer of unknown primary origin is essential. Tumors provided for pathological review should come from tissue that has whenever possible been excised if such tissue is available and accessible. Needle biopsy specimens may provide insufficient tissue for diagnosis or provide tissue that has been too damaged or distorted by the biopsy procedure for accurate diagnosis.[18]

Various immunoperoxidase stains are available for providing a differential diagnosis for cancer of unknown primary origin. An experienced and knowledgeable pathologist will be familiar with appropriate DNA microarray techniques and proteonomic studies to establish a definitive diagnosis. The pathologist typically puts the tissue specimen through 1-4 steps, depending on the need. These studies include light microscopy, immunohistochemical stains,[19] electron microscopy, and chromosomal analysis including cytogenetics.[20] Deatils are as follows:

  • Light microscopy: After initial light microscopic evaluation, most tumors are classifiable as epithelial cancers, lymphomas, sarcomas, melanomas, or germ cell tumors. When cytologic distinguishing features are limited, the tumor may be classified as undifferentiated or poorly differentiated carcinoma.
  • Immunohistochemistry: These tests help define tumor lineage by using peroxidase-labeled antibody against specific tumor antigens. These include stains for keratin, leukocyte common antigen and S-100 (expressed in melanomas), thyroid transcription factor  thyroid transcription factor–1 (TTF-1; for lung and thyroid cancer), prostate-specific antigen (PSA), human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG; for germ cell tumors), alpha-fetoprotein (AFP; for germ-cell tumors and hepatomas); and estrogen receptors, progesterone receptors, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) for breast cancer.
  • Electron microscopy: This study has limited utility in identification of the primary site of cancer of unknown primary origin but may rarely be used in poorly differentiated tumors.
  • Chromosomal studies: In cases of cancer of unknown primary origin with suspected occult nasopharyngeal carcinoma, DNA amplification of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) in tissue may clinch the diagnosis. [21] The presence of iso-chromosome 12p, i(12p), a specific chromosomal marker characteristic of germ cell tumors, can help diagnose extragonadal germ cell tumors in patients with cancer of unknown primary origin. [22, 23]

The majority of cancers of unknown primary origin are adenocarcinomas or undifferentiated tumors (up to 58% in some studies). Less commonly, squamous cell carcinoma, melanoma, sarcoma, and neuroendocrine tumors can also present as metastasis with an unknown primary site of origin.[24] Most studies exclude sarcomas and melanomas from their analysis.

In the approximately 30% of cancers of unknown primary origin in which a full workup establishes a clear pathological diagnosis, the most common epithelial malignancies are lung (15%), pancreas (13%), colon/rectum (6%), kidney (5%), and breast (4%). Sarcomas, melanomas, and lymphomas each contribute 6-8%. The remaining primary tumors are those of stomach (4%), ovary (3%), liver (3%), esophagus (3%), prostate (2%), and a variety of other malignancies (22%).

Previous
Next

Staging

Patients with cancer of unknown primary origin are presumed to all have stage IV disease at the time of initial presentation.

See Cancer of Unknown Primary Staging for more information.

Previous
Next

Immunohistochemistry-based Classification

Guidelines from the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) recommend selected marker assays as part of the basic immunohistochemical workup of cancers of unknown primary.[7] See the table below.

Table. Immunohistochemical markers for cancers of unknown primary (Open Table in a new window)

Primary Marker Primary Tumor Type Additional Markers
CK7- /CK 20 + Colorectal cancer and merkel cell carcinoma CEA and CDX-2  (for GI malignancy)
CK 7 +/CK 20 - Lung,breast, thyroid, endometrial, cervical, pancreas, and cholangiocarcinoma TTF-1 (lung, thyroid)



ER, PR (breast)



GCDFP-15 (gynecologic)



CK- 19 (pancreas)



Ck+7/ CK 20+ Urothelial, ovarian, pancreas, cholangiocarcinoma Urothelin (genitourinary) 



WT-1 (ovarian, mesothelial)



CK = cytokeratin; CEA = carcinoembryonic antigen; TTF1 = thyroid transcription factor 1; ER = estrogen receptor; PR = progesterone receptor; GCDFP-15  = gross cystic disease fluid protein–15; WT-1 = Wilms tumor gene 1; PSA = prostate specific antigen

It is important to note that immunostains are not diagnostic but only supportive of the diagnosis. In some cases, these markers can yield misleading information. In this situation, molecular testing might at times clarify the situation.

Previous
 
 
Contributor Information and Disclosures
Author

Winston W Tan, MD, FACP Associate Professor of Medicine, Mayo Medical School; Consultant and Person-in-Charge of Genitourinary Oncology-Medical Oncology, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic Jacksonville; Vice Chairman of Education, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Mayo Clinic Florida

Winston W Tan, MD, FACP is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Physicians, American Society of Hematology, Texas Medical Association, American Society of Clinical Oncology, Philippine Medical Association

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Coauthor(s)

Nasir Shahab, MD 

Nasir Shahab, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Physicians, American Society of Hematology

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Surabhi Amar, MD Fellow, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Mayo Clinic Jacksonville

Surabhi Amar, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Society of Hematology

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Specialty Editor Board

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Pharmacy; Editor-in-Chief, Medscape Drug Reference

Disclosure: Received salary from Medscape for employment. for: Medscape.

Benjamin Movsas, MD 

Benjamin Movsas, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Radiology, American Radium Society, American Society for Radiation Oncology

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Chief Editor

Wafik S El-Deiry, MD, PhD Rose Dunlap Professor of Medicine, Chief, Division of Hematology and Oncology, Penn State Hershey Medical Center

Wafik S El-Deiry, MD, PhD is a member of the following medical societies: American Association for Cancer Research, American Society for Clinical Investigation, American Society of Gene and Cell Therapy

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Additional Contributors

Robert C Shepard, MD, FACP Associate Professor of Medicine in Hematology and Oncology at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Vice President of Scientific Affairs, Therapeutic Expertise, Oncology, at PRA International

Robert C Shepard, MD, FACP is a member of the following medical societies: American Association for Cancer Research, American Association for Physician Leadership, European Society for Medical Oncology, Association of Clinical Research Professionals, American Federation for Clinical Research, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group, Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer, American Medical Informatics Association, American College of Physicians, American Federation for Medical Research, American Medical Association, American Society of Hematology, Massachusetts Medical Society

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Acknowledgements

Michael Perry, MD, MS, MACP† Former Nellie B Smith Chair of Oncology Emeritus, Former Director, Division of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Former Deputy Director, Ellis Fischel Cancer Center, University of Missouri-Columbia School of Medicine

References
  1. Greco FA, Hainsworth JD. Cancer of Unknown Primary Site. De Vita VT Jr, Lawrence TS, Rosenberg SA, eds. De Vita, Hellman, and Rosenberg's Cancer: Principles and Practice. 10th Ed. Philadelphia PA: Wolters Kluwer Health; 2015. 1720-37.

  2. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2016. American Cancer Society. Available at http://www.cancer.org/Research/CancerFactsFigures/index. Accessed: March 31, 2016.

  3. Hess KR, Abbruzzese MC, Lenzi R, et al. Classification and regression tree analysis of 1000 consecutive patients with unknown primary carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 1999 Nov. 5(11):3403-10. [Medline].

  4. Copeland EM, McBride CM. Axillary metastases from unknown primary sites. Ann Surg. 1973 Jul. 178(1):25-7. [Medline].

  5. Merson M, Andreola S, Galimberti V, et al. Breast carcinoma presenting as axillary metastases without evidence of a primary tumor. Cancer. 1992 Jul 15. 70(2):504-8. [Medline].

  6. Davidson BJ, Spiro RH, Patel S, et al. Cervical metastases of occult origin: the impact of combined modality therapy. Am J Surg. 1994 Nov. 168(5):395-9. [Medline].

  7. [Guideline] Fizazi K, Greco FA, Pavlidis N, Daugaard G, Oien K, Pentheroudakis G, et al. Cancers of unknown primary site: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2015 Sep. 26 Suppl 5:v133-8. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  8. Levine MN, Drummond MF, Labelle RJ. Cost-effectiveness in the diagnosis and treatment of carcinoma of unknown primary origin. CMAJ. 1985 Nov 15. 133(10):977-87. [Medline].

  9. Maisey MN, Ellam SV. Investigating the adenocarcinoma of unknown origin (ACUP): a cost benefit analysis. Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique. 1984. 32(1):57-61. [Medline].

  10. Schapira DV, Jarrett AR. The need to consider survival, outcome, and expense when evaluating and treating patients with unknown primary carcinoma. Arch Intern Med. 1995 Oct 23. 155(19):2050-4. [Medline].

  11. Kole AC, Nieweg OE, Pruim J, et al. Detection of unknown occult primary tumors using positron emission tomography. Cancer. 1998 Mar 15. 82(6):1160-6. [Medline].

  12. Coassin M, Ebrahimi KB, O'Brien JM, Stewart JM. Optical coherence tomography for retinal metastasis with unknown primary tumor. Ophthalmic Surg Lasers Imaging. 2011 Dec 8. 42:e110-3. [Medline].

  13. Molina R, Bosch X, Auge JM, Filella X, Escudero JM, Molina V, et al. Utility of serum tumor markers as an aid in the differential diagnosis of patients with clinical suspicion of cancer and in patients with cancer of unknown primary site. Tumour Biol. 2011 Dec 9. [Medline].

  14. Hainsworth JD, Rubin MS, Spigel DR, Boccia RV, Raby S, Quinn R, et al. Molecular Gene Expression Profiling to Predict the Tissue of Origin and Direct Site-Specific Therapy in Patients With Carcinoma of Unknown Primary Site: A Prospective Trial of the Sarah Cannon Research Institute. J Clin Oncol. 2012 Oct 1. [Medline].

  15. [Guideline] National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Occult Primary (Cancer of Unknown Primary [CUP]) Version 2. 2016. NCCN. Available at http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/occult.pdf. Accessed: March 31, 2016.

  16. Meleth S, Whitehead N, Swinson T, Lux L. Technology assessment on genetic testing or molecular pathology testing of cancers with unknown primary site to determine origin. Technology Assessment Report. RTI International-University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Evidence-based Practice Center for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). February 20, 2013. Available at http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Coverage/DeterminationProcess/downloads/id90TA.pdf.

  17. Hainsworth JD, Rubin MS, Spigel DR, Boccia RV, Raby S, Quinn R, et al. Molecular gene expression profiling to predict the tissue of origin and direct site-specific therapy in patients with carcinoma of unknown primary site: a prospective trial of the Sarah Cannon research institute. J Clin Oncol. 2013 Jan 10. 31 (2):217-23. [Medline]. [Full Text].

  18. Ariza A, Balañá C, Concha Á, Hitt R, Homet B, Matilla A, et al. Update on the diagnosis of cancer of unknown primary (CUP) origin. Clin Transl Oncol. 2011 Jul. 13(7):434-41. [Medline].

  19. Battifora H. Recent progress in the immunohistochemistry of solid tumors. Semin Diagn Pathol. 1984 Nov. 1(4):251-71. [Medline].

  20. Motzer RJ, Rodriguez E, Reuter VE, et al. Molecular and cytogenetic studies in the diagnosis of patients with poorly differentiated carcinomas of unknown primary site. J Clin Oncol. 1995 Jan. 13(1):274-82. [Medline].

  21. Feinmesser R, Miyazaki I, Cheung R, et a;. Diagnosis of nasopharyngeal carcinoma by DNA amplification of tissue obtained by fine-needle aspiration. N Engl J Med. 1992 Jan 2. 326(1):17-21. [Medline].

  22. Bosl GJ, Ilson DH, Rodriguez E, et al. Clinical relevance of the i(12p) marker chromosome in germ cell tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1994 Mar 2. 86(5):349-55. [Medline].

  23. Sandberg AA, Meloni AM, Suijkerbuijk RF. Reviews of chromosome studies in urological tumors. III. Cytogenetics and genes in testicular tumors. J Urol. 1996 May. 155(5):1531-56. [Medline].

  24. Garrow GC, Greco FA, Hainsworth JD. Poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma of unknown primary tumor site. Semin Oncol. 1993 Jun. 20(3):287-91. [Medline].

  25. Hainsworth JD, Greco FA. Treatment of patients with cancer of an unknown primary site. N Engl J Med. 1993 Jul 22. 329(4):257-63. [Medline].

  26. Pavlidis N, Briasoulis E, Hainsworth J, et al. Diagnostic and therapeutic management of cancer of an unknown primary. Eur J Cancer. 2003 Sep. 39(14):1990-2005. [Medline].

  27. Moertel CG, Reitemeier RJ, Schutt AJ, et al. Treatment of the patient with adenocarcinoma of unknown origin. Cancer. 1972 Dec. 30(6):1469-72. [Medline].

  28. Righi PD, Sofferman RA. Screening unilateral tonsillectomy in the unknown primary. Laryngoscope. 1995 May. 105(5 Pt 1):548-50. [Medline].

  29. Guarischi A, Keane TJ, Elhakim T. Metastatic inguinal nodes from an unknown primary neoplasm. A review of 56 cases. Cancer. 1987 Feb 1. 59(3):572-7. [Medline].

  30. Mistry RC, Qureshi SS, Talole SD, et al. Cervical lymph node metastases of squamous cell carcinoma from an unknown primary: Outcomes and patterns of failure. Indian J Cancer. 2008 Apr-Jun. 45(2):54-8. [Medline].

  31. Guarischi A, Keane TJ, Elhakim T. Metastatic inguinal nodes from an unknown primary neoplasm. A review of 56 cases. Cancer. 1987 Feb 1. 59 (3):572-7. [Medline].

  32. Pentheroudakis G, Briasoulis E, Kalofonos HP, Fountzilas G, Economopoulos T, Samelis G, et al. Docetaxel and carboplatin combination chemotherapy as outpatient palliative therapy in carcinoma of unknown primary: a multicentre Hellenic Cooperative Oncology Group phase II study. Acta Oncol. 2008. 47 (6):1148-55. [Medline].

  33. Hainsworth JD, Spigel DR, Farley C, et al. Phase II trial of bevacizumab and erlotinib in carcinomas of unknown primary site: the Minnie Pearl Cancer Research Network. J Clin Oncol. 2007 May 1. 25(13):1747-52. [Medline].

  34. Hainsworth JD, Spigel DR, Thompson DS, Murphy PB, Lane CM, Waterhouse DM, et al. Paclitaxel/carboplatin plus bevacizumab/erlotinib in the first-line treatment of patients with carcinoma of unknown primary site. Oncologist. 2009 Dec. 14 (12):1189-97. [Medline].

  35. Montero AJ, Varadhachary GR, Abbruzzese JL. Unknown Primary Carcinomas. Kantarjian HN, Koller CM, Wolff RA. MD Anderson Manual of Medical Oncology. McGraw Hill; 2006. 937-954.

  36. Pavlidis N, Fizazi K. Cancer of unknown primary (CUP). Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2005 Jun. 54(3):243-50. [Medline].

 
Previous
Next
 
CT scan of neck with contrast. The arrows indicate metastatic lymphadenopathy. Image courtesy of Head and Neck Cancer-Multidisciplinary Approach, Davidson, BJ.
Table. Immunohistochemical markers for cancers of unknown primary
Primary Marker Primary Tumor Type Additional Markers
CK7- /CK 20 + Colorectal cancer and merkel cell carcinoma CEA and CDX-2  (for GI malignancy)
CK 7 +/CK 20 - Lung,breast, thyroid, endometrial, cervical, pancreas, and cholangiocarcinoma TTF-1 (lung, thyroid)



ER, PR (breast)



GCDFP-15 (gynecologic)



CK- 19 (pancreas)



Ck+7/ CK 20+ Urothelial, ovarian, pancreas, cholangiocarcinoma Urothelin (genitourinary) 



WT-1 (ovarian, mesothelial)



CK = cytokeratin; CEA = carcinoembryonic antigen; TTF1 = thyroid transcription factor 1; ER = estrogen receptor; PR = progesterone receptor; GCDFP-15  = gross cystic disease fluid protein–15; WT-1 = Wilms tumor gene 1; PSA = prostate specific antigen
Previous
Next
 
 
 
 
 
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2016 by WebMD LLC. This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.