Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Autoantibody positivity and false-negative cytology can mask invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma in patients with IPAFLung cancer can mimic autoimmune lung disease in some patients

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Recognize that autoantibody positivity and negative cytology may mask invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma in patients with IPAF.

This case report describes a 78-year-old female diagnosed with invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma and interstitial pneumonia with autoimmune features (IPAF). The patient presented with positive serology for ANA (1:100), AMA-M2 (161.75 U/mL), RF (78.2 IU/mL), and anti-CCP (300 U/mL). Despite these findings, inflammatory markers including ESR, CRP, and six cytokines were normal.

Diagnostic imaging and BALF cytology did not show malignant cells, which could lead to a misdiagnosis of primary interstitial lung disease. Histopathological analysis eventually confirmed invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma with CK7+, focal CK20+, TTF-1-, and Napsin A- markers.

The authors note that the presence of autoantibodies and the potential for false-negative BALF cytology in lepidic growth patterns can complicate the clinical picture. This case serves as a reminder to maintain a high index of suspicion for malignancy in patients presenting with IPAF features. Due to the single-case nature of the report, the findings are limited in generalizability.

How this fits prior evidence

This case report addresses a gap in clinical recognition of malignancy in patients with interstitial pneumonia with autoimmune features (IPAF). While previous coverage noted that JAK inhibitors showed 81.7% treatment retention in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and interstitial lung disease, this case highlights how autoantibody positivity (ANA, AMA-M2, RF, and anti-CCP) can mimic autoimmune conditions and potentially mask an underlying malignancy like invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma.

Doctors sometimes struggle to tell the difference between a serious lung infection and a rare type of cancer. In one case, a 78-year-old woman was treated for a condition that looked like an autoimmune lung disease. Because her blood tests showed several markers for autoimmune issues, the doctors initially did not suspect cancer.

Further testing eventually revealed that the patient actually had invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma, a type of lung cancer. This specific type of cancer can grow in a way that makes it hard to see on initial tests. In this case, the fluid from her lungs did not show any cancer cells at first, even though the cancer was present.

This case highlights a real challenge for doctors. Because the patient's blood work looked like an autoimmune disease, the cancer was hidden. This reminds medical teams to stay alert for cancer when patients show symptoms that look like other conditions, especially when initial tests come back clear.

What this means for you:
Lung cancer can mimic autoimmune symptoms and test results, making it hard to diagnose correctly.

Common questions

Why was the cancer hard to find at first?

The cancer grew in a way that made it hard to see on initial tests. Specifically, the fluid from the lungs did not show any cancer cells during the first check. Because the patient's blood tests showed several markers for autoimmune issues, the cancer was hidden behind symptoms that looked like a different condition.

What specific type of lung cancer was involved?

The patient was diagnosed with invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma. This is a specific type of lung cancer that can sometimes be mistaken for other conditions because of how it appears in imaging and blood tests.

What markers were found in the patient's blood?

The patient's blood tests were positive for several markers, including ANA (1:100), AMA-M2 (161.75 U/mL), RF (78.2 IU/mL), and anti-CCP (300 U/mL). These results are typically associated with autoimmune diseases, which is why the cancer was initially missed.

Study Details

Study typeSystematic review
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedSep 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
BackgroundInterstitial pneumonia with autoimmune features (IPAF) is an exclusionary diagnosis that requires the exclusion of alternative etiologies, including malignancy. Invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma (IMA) of the lung can radiologically and clinically mimic interstitial lung disease (ILD), and some lung cancer patients may present with non-specific autoantibody positivity, creating a diagnostic trap that may lead to misdiagnosis as IPAF.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical data, serology, imaging, bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) cytology, and pathology of a 78-year-old female patient, combined with a literature review.ResultsThe patient presented with cough and sputum production lasting two months. Chest CT showed diffuse bilateral high-density opacities with septal thickening. Pulmonary function tests revealed moderate diffusion impairment, and Velcro crackles were present on auscultation. Autoantibodies were positive for ANA (1:100, cytoplasmic granular pattern), AMA-M2 (161.75 U/mL), RF (78.2 IU/mL), and anti-CCP antibody (300 U/mL). Notably, all systemic inflammatory markers (ESR, CRP, and six cytokines) were normal. BALF and liquid-based cytology revealed no malignant cells. Rheumatology consultation favored a diagnosis of IPAF, and empirical methylprednisolone 40 mg/d was initiated. After one week, chest CT showed no resolution; mycophenolate mofetil and nintedanib were added. Despite standard anti-infective and immunosuppressive therapy, imaging remained unchanged and tumor markers remained persistently elevated. CT-guided percutaneous lung biopsy was performed, and histopathological examination confirmed invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma (CK7+, focal CK20+, TTF-1−, Napsin A−).ConclusionIn patients with suspected IPAF, the combination of normal inflammatory markers with other atypical features should prompt re-evaluation of the autoimmune etiology. The lepidic growth pattern of IMA can lead to false-negative BALF cytology; a negative result does not exclude malignancy. As an exclusionary diagnosis, IPAF must be established only after thorough exclusion of infection, malignancy, and other causes. Immunosuppressive therapy should not be initiated based solely on autoantibody positivity and ILD imaging.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.