The value of Wilms tumor susceptibility gene 1 in cytologic preparations as a marker for malignant mesothelioma

Immunochemistry in the work-up of mesothelioma and its differential diagnosis and mimickers

The differential diagnosis in cellular effusions with cytological atypia often includes malignant mesothelioma (MM), reactive mesothelial proliferation, and malignancies of metastatic origin, particularly carcinomas. The International Reporting System for Serous Fluid recently established guidelines for reporting MM. In conjunction with the cytomorphologic evaluation, the role of immunochemistry (IC) was emphasized as a very useful tool in the workup of serous fluids, especially with the availability of novel markers. Utilizing a panel of markers, IC allows the characterization of the cells, whether mesothelial or not, and when mesothelial origin is established, IC can frequently assist in delineating its benign or malignant nature. IC can also confirm metastatic disease, allowing the identification of the primary origin in most cases. This review summarizes the current status of IC and its role in the diagnosis of MM and its differential diagnosis in serous fluids.

Immunohistochemical Expression of Wilms’ Tumor 1 Protein in Human Tissues: From Ontogenesis to Neoplastic Tissues

The human Wilms’ tumor gene (WT1) was originally isolated in a Wilms’ tumor of the kidney as a tumor suppressor gene. Numerous isoforms of WT1, by combination of alternative translational start sites, alternative RNA splicing and RNA editing, have been well documented. During human ontogenesis, according to the antibodies used, anti-C or N-terminus WT1 protein, nuclear expression can be frequently obtained in numerous tissues, including metanephric and mesonephric glomeruli, and mesothelial and sub-mesothelial cells, while cytoplasmic staining is usually found in developing smooth and skeletal cells, myocardium, glial cells, neuroblasts, adrenal cortical cells and the endothelial cells of blood vessels. WT1 has been originally described as a tumor suppressor gene in renal Wilms’ tumor, but more recent studies emphasized its potential oncogenic role in several neoplasia with a variable immunostaining pattern that can be exclusively nuclear, cytoplasmic or both, according to the antibodies used (anti-C or N-terminus WT1 protein). With the present review we focus on the immunohistochemical expression of WT1 in some tumors, emphasizing its potential diagnostic role and usefulness in differential diagnosis. In addition, we analyze the WT1 protein expression profile in human embryonal/fetal tissues in order to suggest a possible role in the development of organs and tissues and to establish whether expression in some tumors replicates that observed during the development of tissues from which these tumors arise.

WT1 expression is increased in primary fibroblasts derived from Dupuytren's disease tissues

Dupuytren's disease (DD) is a fibroproliferative and contractile fibrosis of the palmar fascia that, like all other heritable fibroses, is currently incurable. While DD is invariably benign, it exhibits some molecular similarities to malignant tumours, including increased levels of ß-catenin, onco-fetal fibronectin, periostin and insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-II. To gain additional insights into the pathogenesis of DD, we have assessed the expression of WT1, encoding Wilm's tumour 1, an established tumour biomarker that is syntenic with IGF2, the gene encoding IGF-II in humans. We found that WT1 expression is robustly and consistently up regulated in primary fibroblasts derived from the fibrotic palmar fascia of patients with DD (DD cells), whereas syngeneic fibroblasts derived from the macroscopically unaffected palmar fascia in these patients and allogeneic fibroblasts derived from normal palmar fascia exhibited very low or undetectable WT1 transcript levels. WT1 immunoreactivity was evident in a subset of cells in the fibrotic palmar fascia of patients with DD, but not in macroscopically unaffected palmar fascia. These findings identify WT1 expression as a novel biomarker of fibrotic palmar fascia and are consistent with the hypothesis that the pathogeneses of DD and malignant tumours have molecular similarities.

Pathology of mesothelioma

The incidence of mesothelioma has been gradually increasing in Japan, and the underlying factor for this is considered to be the increase in the amount of asbestos imported into Japan between 1960 and 1975. Mesothelioma can be roughly divided into localized and diffuse types, but the former is extremely rare. In making a diagnosis of mesothelioma, it is important to confirm the location of tumor and the specific gross findings before histological examination. Mesothelioma can be categorized histologically as epithelioid type, sarcomatoid type, biphasic type, desmoplastic type, among others. It can take many forms; consequently, there are many diseases to be differentiated when the diagnosis of mesothelioma is based on histological analyses. Immunohistochemical stains are useful for making a diagnosis, but the correct combination of antibodies as positive or negative markers should be selected and a comprehensive assessment of the staining results is necessary. The accuracy of the pathological diagnosis is very important to the patients because they can be receive official compensation or relief when the diagnosis of mesothelioma is confirmed. Under present conditions, both clinicians and pathologists must make a concerted effort to improve the accuracy of the diagnosis of mesothelioma.

Cytologic malignancy versus benignancy: how useful are the "newer" markers in body fluid cytology?

CONTEXT

Differentiating reactive effusion, malignant mesothelioma, and metastatic adenocarcinoma in body cavity fluids can be challenging. Interpreting immunohistochemical markers in cell block preparations can be difficult because of nonspecific staining, focal staining, or poor staining quality. We selected a panel of conventional and newer markers to assess their utility in evaluating effusions.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of 5 immunohistochemical markers in the differential diagnosis of reactive mesothelial proliferation, malignant mesothelioma, and metastatic adenocarcinoma in body cavity fluids.

DESIGN

A total of 72 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded cell block specimens from pleural and peritoneal effusions, including 5 mesotheliomas, 48 adenocarcinomas, and 19 benign effusions were stained with antibodies against calretinin, D2-40, XIAP, MOC-31, and WT1.

RESULTS

All benign effusions and mesotheliomas demonstrated diffuse membranous staining with D2-40. All mesotheliomas displayed calretinin positivity, whereas only 58% of benign effusions stained focally with calretinin. MOC-31 was positive in all cases of adenocarcinoma, whereas all benign effusions and mesotheliomas were negative. All cases of the metastatic adenocarcinoma were negative for calretinin and D2-40. However, background reactive mesothelial cells were positive for calretinin and D2-40. Overall, D2-40 highlighted more mesothelial cells than calretinin. WT1 was positive in 50% of benign effusions, 60% of mesotheliomas, and 27% of adenocarcinomas. XIAP stained most mesotheliomas (80%), some adenocarcinomas (51%), and rare benign effusions (11%).

CONCLUSIONS

MOC-31 and D2-40 were very sensitive and specific markers of epithelial and mesothelial cells, respectively. Compared with calretinin, D2-40 was a more sensitive marker of mesothelial cells. WT1 proved to be nonspecific. XIAP was not a sensitive marker for malignancy and had a limited value in cytology. We recommend using a panel to include MOC-31 and D2-40 to improve diagnostic accuracy in body cavity effusions.

Fine-needle aspiration of malignant mesothelioma with unusual morphologic features: A case report

Malignant mesothelioma is an aggressive neoplasm linked to asbestos exposure. Most mesothelioma patients present with pleural effusion and the fluid is typically sent for cytological examination. Therefore, cytopathologists are most familiar with features of mesothelioma in fluid preparations. We present here a case of malignant mesothelioma with unusual cytological features diagnosed on FNA. The diagnosis was confirmed by immuno-histochemical and electron microscopic studies. In addition, we compare the cytomorphological features observed in malignant effusion versus fine-needle aspiration.

Biologic, cytogenetic, and molecular factors in mesothelial proliferations

Although mesothelioma cases may have peaked in the 1990s in developed countries, it is expected that there will be over 70,000 cases diagnosed in the United States over the next 5 decades. With the industrial expansion in Southeast Asia and China and the continued use of asbestos, an epidemic of mesothelioma cases is anticipated over the next several decades. A considerable amount has been learned about the cytogenetic and molecular genetics of mesotheliomas. However, in-depth studies are needed to further define specific factors that may provide for early diagnosis, surgical treatment, oncologic management, and gene therapy. Serologic markers for surveillance of those with asbestos exposure and at risk for mesothelioma are needed. Targeted therapy using molecular markers and gene therapy may provide a means to reverse mesothelial proliferations or stabilize tumor growth and allow for surgical resection. The future holds great promise in identifying mesothelioma gene expression profiles (genomics, gene microarrays) and proteins (proteomics) that may produce the key to dealing with this dismal and devastating neoplasm.

Evaluation of 12 antibodies for distinguishing epithelioid mesothelioma from adenocarcinoma: identification of a three-antibody immunohistochemical panel with maximal sensitivity and specificity

We evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of 10 monoclonal and two polyclonal antibodies for distinguishing epithelioid mesothelioma from adenocarcinoma (AdCA) using immunohistochemistry (IHC). The antibodies were directed against the mesothelial-associated antigens mesothelin, calretinin, cytokeratin 5, thrombomodulin, Wilms' tumor-1 (WT-1) gene product and HBME-1, and the nonmesothelial antigens Lewis-Y blood group (antibody BG8), MOC-31, BerEp4, CD15, and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) family. The 133 tumors evaluated included 65 malignant epithelioid mesotheliomas, 22 lung AdCAs, 27 ovarian serous carcinomas, 24 breast carcinomas, and five gastric carcinomas. Diagnoses were based on clinical, histologic, ultrastructural, and/or IHC findings. Calretinin had the best sensitivity for mesothelioma (95%), followed by HBME-1 (84%), WT-1 (78%), cytokeratin 5 (76%), mesothelin (75%), and vimentin and thrombomodulin (68%). Thrombomodulin had the best specificity for mesothelioma (92%), followed by cytokeratin 5 (89%), calretinin (87%) vimentin (84%), and HBME-1 (45%). When ovarian carcinomas were excluded from the analysis, the specificity of mesothelin and WT-1 for the diagnosis of mesothelioma increased to 90 and 81%, respectively. The sensitivity of the nonmesothelial antigens for AdCA was organ dependent, with BG8 performing best in the breast cancer group (96%), and BerEp4, BG8, MOC-31 performing best in the lung cancer group (100%). The specificity of the nonmesothelial antigens for AdCA was 98% for BG8 and CEA, 97% for CD15, 95% for BerEp4, and 87% for MOC-31. A novel statistical analysis technique employing logic regression analysis identified a three-antibody immunohistochemical panel including calretinin, BG8, and MOC-31, which provided over 96% sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing epithelioid mesothelioma from AdCA.

Evaluation of a panel of molecular markers for the diagnosis of malignant serous effusions

PURPOSE

Our main goal was to evaluate a panel of molecular markers for the detection of cancer cells in serous effusions and to determine their value as an adjunctive reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) test to cytologic examination.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

One hundred fourteen serous effusions from 71 patients with tumors and 43 patients with benign diseases were subjected to RT-PCR for expression of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), epithelial cell adhesion molecule (Ep-CAM), E-cadherin, mammaglobin, mucin 1 (MUC1) isoforms MUC1/REP, MUC1/Y, and MUC1/Z, calretinin, and Wilms' tumor 1 susceptibility gene.

RESULTS

CEA, Ep-CAM, E-cadherin, and mammaglobin were specifically expressed in malignant effusions. The sensitivity of RT-PCR in cytologically negative malignant effusions was 63.1% combining CEA and Ep-CAM (with 100% specificity) and reached 78.9% adding MUC1/Y or MUC1/Z (with 93% specificity). In the whole population of effusions, the combination of cytology with RT-PCR of CEA and Ep-CAM yielded a 90.1% sensitivity, a specificity and a positive predictive value of 100%, and a 86% negative predictive value for malignancy. Adding MUC1/Y or MUC1/Z to the panel, the sensitivity was 94.5% with 93% specificity, 95.7% PPV, and 90.9% negative predictive value. Moreover, CEA and mammaglobin were specifically expressed in epithelial malignancies, and mammaglobin was mainly expressed in effusions from breast carcinoma (97.3% of specificity).

CONCLUSIONS

A combination of cytology and RT-PCR analysis of CEA and Ep-CAM significantly improved the detection sensitivity of tumor cells in serous effusions. RT-PCR analysis of CEA, Ep-CAM, and mammaglobin in serous effusions could be a beneficial adjunct to cytology for the diagnosis of malignancy.

Sensitivity and specificity of immunohistochemical markers used in the diagnosis of epithelioid mesothelioma: a detailed systematic analysis using published data

AIMS

Immunohistochemistry is frequently employed to aid the distinction between mesothelioma and pulmonary adenocarcinoma metastatic to the pleura, but there is uncertainty as to which antibodies are most useful. We analysed published data in order to establish sensitivity and specificity of antibodies used to distinguish between these tumours with a view to defining the most appropriate immunohistochemical panel to use when faced with this diagnostic problem.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A systematic analysis of the results of 88 published papers comparing immunohistochemical staining of a panel of antibodies in mesothelioma with epithelioid areas, and pulmonary adenocarcinoma metastatic to the pleura. Results for a total of 15 antibodies were analysed and expressed in terms of sensitivity and specificity. The most sensitive antibodies for identifying pulmonary adenocarcinoma were MOC-31 and BG8 (both 93%), whilst the most specific were monoclonal CEA (97%) and TTF-1 (100%). The most sensitive antibodies to identify epithelioid mesothelioma were CK5/6 (83%) and HBME-1 (85%). The most specific antibodies were CK5/6 (85%) and WT1 (96%).

CONCLUSIONS

No single antibody is able to differentiate reliably between these two tumours. The use of a small panel of antibodies with a high combined sensitivity and specificity is recommended.

Monoclonal antibody MOC-31 reactivity as a marker for adenocarcinoma in cytologic preparations

BACKGROUND

It has been shown previously that detection of the epithelial membrane antigen using the mouse monoclonal antibody MOC-31 has diagnostic utility in the distinction between mesothelioma and metastatic carcinoma in body fluids. The current immunohistochemical study confirmed the effectiveness of MOC-31 as a marker for adenocarcinoma from a broad range of primary sites in body fluid cytology prepared as paraffin sections of cell blocks.

METHODS

The authors evaluated 112 cell blocks for MOC-31 immunoreactivity, including 17 mesotheliomas, 86 metastatic adenocarcinomas from various sites, and 9 control fluids from patients with nonneoplastic conditions.

RESULTS

Membranous reactivity for MOC-31 was observed in 86 of 86 samples (100%) of metastatic adenocarcinoma, regardless of the specific primary site. Sixteen of 17 mesothelioma samples were negative. In all but 1 sample of adenocarcinoma, > 90% of tumor cells present showed reactivity, and the staining intensity consistently was strong. Staining of scattered, morphologically benign mesothelial cells was observed in nine samples but did not interfere with interpretation.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the staining profile, MOC-31 represented an effective marker for metastatic carcinoma in cell block preparations and may aid in distinguishing between benign and malignant mesothelial cells in these tumors.

An expression-based site of origin diagnostic method designed for clinical application to cancer of unknown origin

Gene expression profiling offers a promising new technique for the diagnosis and prognosis of cancer. We have applied this technology to build a clinically robust site of origin classifier with the ultimate aim of applying it to determine the origin of cancer of unknown primary (CUP). A single cDNA microarray platform was used to profile 229 primary and metastatic tumors representing 14 tumor types and multiple histologic subtypes. This data set was subsequently used for training and validation of a support vector machine (SVM) classifier, demonstrating 89% accuracy using a 13-class model. Further, we show the translation of a five-class classifier to a quantitative PCR-based platform. Selecting 79 optimal gene markers, we generated a quantitative-PCR low-density array, allowing the assay of both fresh-frozen and formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue. Data generated using both quantitative PCR and microarray were subsequently used to train and validate a cross-platform SVM model with high prediction accuracy. Finally, we applied our SVM classifiers to 13 cases of CUP. We show that the microarray SVM classifier was capable of making high confidence predictions in 11 of 13 cases. These predictions were supported by comprehensive review of the patients' clinical histories.

Immunohistochemical Expression of Wilms Tumor Gene Protein in Different Histologic Subtypes of Ovarian Carcinomas

Context.—Immunohistochemical expression of Wilms tumor gene protein (WT1) has previously been described in primary ovarian carcinomas.

Objective.—To evaluate differences in WT1 expression among different histologic subtypes of ovarian carcinomas and the correlation to the histologic grade.

Design.—Ninety-one primary ovarian carcinomas were reviewed, and 1 representative formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded tissue block was selected. One slide from each case included in the study was immunostained using the WT1 clone 6F-D2. The immunoreactivity was graded according to the percentage of stained tumor cells. Only nuclear staining was considered a positive reaction. A tumor was regarded as negative if less than 1% of the tumor cells was stained.

Results.—All serous carcinomas (28/28) showed WT1 expression, whereas all mucinous (14/14) and all clear cell carcinomas (14/14) were negative. The lone malignant Brenner tumor and 3 (60%) of 5 undifferentiated carcinomas included in the study were also negative. The endometrioid carcinomas showed either no reaction for WT1 or were diffusely positive with more than 50% of the tumor cells stained. All the grade 1 tumors (10/10) were negative, whereas 5 (45%) of the 11 grade 2 tumors and 5 (63%) of the 8 grade 3 tumors showed a positive reaction.

Conclusion.—The present study demonstrates differences in immunohistochemical expression of WT1 among different histologic subtypes of primary ovarian carcinomas. Regarding the endometrioid subtype, the expression seems to be correlated to the histologic grade.

The value of ThinPrep and cytospin preparation in pleural effusion cytological diagnosis of mesothelioma and adenocarcinoma

The diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma requires an integration of the clinical presentation, radiological studies, and immunohistochemical stain of histological sections. Cytological diagnosis on pleural effusions of mesothelioma and pulmonary adenocarcinoma is highly desirable but debatable. A spectrum of cytological features has been found to be associated more commonly with malignant mesothelioma (e.g., peripheral cytoplasmic skirt, bubbly cytoplasm, cyanophilic cytoplasm, and scalloped border of cell balls) vs. adenocarcinoma (e.g., two-cell population, inspissated cytoplasmic material, cytoplasmic vacuole, angulated and indented nuclei, and smooth border of cell balls) to only name a few. The current study is designed to assess whether the introduction of a liquid-based technology such as ThinPrep (TP) can provide additional diagnostic value in addition to the conventional cytospin Diff-Quik (DQ) preparations. Pleural effusion specimens were prepared with split samples for DQ-stained cytospin and Papanicolaou-stained liquid-based TP. Fifteen pleural effusion samples with immunohistologically confirmed malignant mesothelioma and 13 pleural effusion samples of immunohistologically confirmed pulmonary adenocarcinomas were retrieved from our files. Both DQ cytospin- and Papanicolaou-stained TP slides were evaluated for the known cytological features associated with malignant mesothelioma (25 cytological features) and adenocarcinoma (22 cytological features) without knowledge of the original cytological and histological diagnoses. The McNemar test was used to compare these two cytological preparations for both malignant mesothelioma and pulmonary adenocarcinoma. In the malignant mesothelioma group, 4 of 25 cytological features evaluated, bubbly cytoplasm (P = 0.002), vacuolated cytoplasm (P = 0.005), cell-in-cell arrangement (P = 0.007) and irregular nuclear contour (P = 0.083), were seen more frequently in the DQ cytospin preparation, as opposed to only one feature, nuclear size enlargement (P = 0.008), more readily seen using TP. In the pulmonary adenocarcinoma group, only 1 of 22 cytological features evaluated, presence of angulated or indented nuclei (P = 0.025), was seen more frequently in DQ as opposed to two features, presence of two- cell population (P = 0.04) and presence of micropapillary structures (P = 0.1), were seen more readily in TP. All other cytological features evaluated distinguishing mesotheliomas (20 features) and pleural adenocarcinomas (19 features) were seen equally readily in both types of specimen preparation techniques. This study suggests that the liquid-based TP preparation of pleural effusions does not appear to provide additional diagnostic value when compared with the DQ cytospin preparation in the cytological distinction between mesothelioma and adenocarcinoma in pleural effusions. Most cytological features evaluated, 20 of 25 (mesothelioma) and 19 of 22 (adenocarcinoma), can be seen in both preparation techniques.

The role of WT1 in oncogenesis: tumor suppressor or oncogene?

Although originally identified as a tumor suppressor gene, WT1 is overexpressed in a variety of hematologic malignancies and solid tumors, including acute leukemia, breast cancer, malignant mesothelioma, renal cell carcinoma, and others. Overexpression of both wild-type and mutant WT1 has been reported. In some cases, this finding represents overexpression of a gene that should be expressed at lower levels, but in other cases, WT1 is expressed at high levels in a tissue type in which there is normally no expression at all. In this review, the mechanisms of altered WT1 expression are explored, including changes in promoter methylation. WT1 target genes that may be important for oncogenesis are discussed, as is the use of WT1 expression as a diagnostic tool. The prognostic implications of altered WT1 expression and the potential for immunotherapy aimed at WT1 are also discussed.