Single-cell transcriptomics reveal metastatic CLDN4+ cancer cells underlying the recurrence of malignant pleural effusion in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Recurrent malignant pleural effusion (MPE) resulting from non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is easily refractory to conventional therapeutics and lacks predictive markers. The cellular or genetic signatures of recurrent MPE still remain largely uncertain.

METHODS

16 NSCLC patients with pleural effusions were recruited, followed by corresponding treatments based on primary tumours. Non-recurrent or recurrent MPE was determined after 3-6 weeks of treatments. The status of MPE was verified by computer tomography (CT) and cytopathology, and the baseline pleural fluids were collected for single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq). Samples were then integrated and profiled. Cellular communications and trajectories were inferred by bioinformatic algorithms. Comparative analysis was conducted and the results were further validated by quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) in a larger MPE cohort from the authors' centre (n = 64).

RESULTS

The scRNA-seq revealed that 33 590 cells were annotated as 7 major cell types and further characterized into 14 cell clusters precisely. The cell cluster C1, classified as Epithelial Cell Adhesion Molecule (EpCAM)+ metastatic cancer cell and correlated with activation of tight junction and adherence junction, was significantly enriched in the recurrent MPE group, in which Claudin-4 (CLDN4) was identified. The subset cell cluster C3 of C1, which was enriched in recurrent MPE and demonstrated a phenotype of ameboidal-type cell migration, also showed a markedly higher expression of CLDN4. Meanwhile, the expression of CLDN4 was positively correlated with E74 Like ETS Transcription Factor 3 (ELF3), EpCAM and Tumour Associated Calcium Signal Transducer 2 (TACSTD2), independent of driver-gene status. CLDN4 was also found to be associated with the expression of Hypoxia Inducible Factor 1 Subunit Alpha (HIF1A) and Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor A (VEGFA), and the cell cluster C1 was the major mediator in cellular communication of VEGFA signalling. In the extensive MPE cohort, a notably increased expression of CLDN4 in cells from pleural effusion among patients diagnosed with recurrent MPE was observed, compared with the non-recurrent group, which was also associated with a trend towards worse overall survival (OS).

CONCLUSIONS

CLDN4 could be considered as a predictive marker of recurrent MPE among patients with advanced NSCLC. Further validation for its clinical value in cohorts with larger sample size and in-depth mechanism studies on its biological function are warranted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not applicable.

Utility of Immunohistochemistry in the Diagnosis of Pleuropulmonary and Mediastinal Cancers: A Review and Update

CONTEXT.—

Immunohistochemistry has become a valuable ancillary tool for the accurate classification of pleuropulmonary and mediastinal neoplasms necessary for therapeutic decisions and predicting prognostic outcome. Diagnostic accuracy has significantly improved because of the continuous discoveries of tumor-associated biomarkers and the development of effective immunohistochemical panels.

OBJECTIVE.—

To increase the accuracy of diagnosis and classify pleuropulmonary neoplasms through immunohistochemistry.

DATA SOURCES.—

Literature review and the author's research data and personal practice experience.

CONCLUSIONS.—

This review article highlights that appropriately selecting immunohistochemical panels enables pathologists to effectively diagnose most primary pleuropulmonary neoplasms and differentiate primary lung tumors from a variety of metastatic tumors to the lung. Knowing the utilities and pitfalls of each tumor-associated biomarker is essential to avoid potential diagnostic errors.

Claudin-4 immunocytochemistry is specific and sensitive for the diagnosis of malignant carcinomatous effusions: Results from a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Claudin-4, a tight junction associated protein expressed in epithelial cells, is purported as a highly specific and sensitive marker for epithelial malignancies. Our aim was to assess the sensitivity, specificity and real-time utility of claudin-4 immunocytochemistry (ICC) in the diagnostic work-up of suspected malignant effusions.

METHODS

Claudin-4 (3E2C1 clone) ICC was performed prospectively in effusion cell blocks where other ICC markers were being performed as part of reporting over 3 months. Based on claudin-4 staining in unequivocal malignant and reactive effusions, the sensitivity and specificity was calculated. In cases signed out as inconclusive encompassing atypia of undetermined significance (AUS) and suspicious for malignancy (SFM) and negative for malignancy, change in diagnostic category based on addition of claudin-4 ICC was assessed.

RESULTS

Study included 107 effusions. Claudin-4 stained 100% of metastatic adenocarcinomas including those with primaries in lung, breast, ovary, female genital tract, gastrointestinal tract and pancreatic-biliary tract, and was negative in all reactive mesothelial and mesothelioma effusions with sensitivity of 100% (48/48) and specificity of 95% (20/21) for adenocarcinoma. Claudin-4 upgraded the diagnostic category to positive in 70% (16/23) of SFM, 20% (1/5) of AUS, and in 50% (5/10) of negative effusions. Among cases with confirmed serosal involvement status on follow-up, claudin-4 showed sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive values of 85% (11/13), 100% (3/3), 100% (10/10) and 75% (3/4), respectively, for metastatic adenocarcinoma.

CONCLUSION

Claudin-4 as a single marker is sensitive and specific for adenocarcinoma and is a valuable addition to the ICC armamentarium.

Diagnostic Utility of Claudin4 and Comparison with BerEp4 as a Marker for Metastatic Adenocarcinoma in Serous Effusions

INTRODUCTION

Fluid cytology for malignant cells is important for diagnosis and staging of malignancies. Morphological overlap between reactive mesothelial cells and adenocarcinoma poses challenges, for which many immunohistochemical markers like BerEp4 and MOC-31 have been used extensively. Claudin4 is a new marker with promising results; however, further studies are required to establish its role as a pan-carcinoma marker in serous effusions. This study aimed to determine the utility of Claudin4 in diagnosing metastatic adenocarcinoma in effusions and comparing its performance with BerEp4.

METHODS

Claudin4 immunohistochemistry (IHC) was performed on effusion cell blocks (n = 60) reported as positive or suspicious for metastatic adenocarcinoma on cytology over a 1-year period and was scored for intensity (0-3) and percentage of positive cells (0-4). The results were compared with BerEp4 IHC and correlated with follow-up. Ten benign effusions were included as negative controls.

RESULTS

Claudin4 IHC was positive in all 60 (100%) cases, irrespective of the primary site. BerEp4 IHC was positive in 58 (96.7%) fluids and negative in 2 (3.3%) cases. All 10 benign effusions were negative for Claudin4 and BerEp4. Claudin4 showed higher intensity and proportion scores as compared to BerEp4 in cases where tumor cells were predominantly singly scattered and was comparable to BerEp4 where tumor cells were arranged in groups. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of Claudin4 in our study was 100%. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of BerEP4 was 96.7%, 100%, 100%, and 83.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Claudin4 IHC staining results were comparable to BerEp4, irrespective of the primary site, and it performed better in cases where tumor cells were predominantly scattered singly.

Claudin-10 is a new candidate prognostic marker in metastatic high-grade serous carcinoma

The objective of this study was to analyze the expression and prognostic role of the tight junction protein claudin-10 in high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC). Claudin-10 protein expression by immunohistochemistry was analyzed in 588 HGSC (414 effusions, 174 surgical specimens). Expression in mesotheliomas (n = 97; 47 effusions, 50 surgical specimens) was studied for comparative purposes. CLDN10 mRNA expression by quantitative RT-PCR (qRT-PCR) was analyzed in 40 HGSC effusions. Claudin-10 protein expression was found in 360/588 (61%) HGSC vs. 19/97 (20%) mesotheliomas (p < 0.001), and was higher in HGSC surgical specimens compared to effusions (p < 0.001). qRT-PCR confirmed the presence of CLDN10 mRNA in HGSC effusions. High (> 25%) claudin-10 expression in HGSC effusions was significantly associated with shorter overall survival (OS; p = 0.036) and progression-free survival (PFS; p = 0.045) in univariate analysis, and was an independent prognosticator of OS in multivariate analysis (p = 0.045). In conclusion, claudin-10 protein expression is higher in HGSC compared to mesothelioma, although the diagnostic power of this marker appear to be lesser than other claudin family members. Claudin-10 expression in HGSC effusions is marker of more aggressive disease.

The utility of claudin‐4 versus MOC‐31 and Ber‐EP4 in the diagnosis of metastatic carcinoma in cytology specimens

BACKGROUND

Claudin-4 is a sensitive and specific marker for carcinoma in effusion cytology. The authors examined the diagnostic use of claudin-4 versus MOC-31 and Ber-EP4 by comparing their sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) in differentiating carcinoma from mesothelioma and benign/mesothelial hyperplasia in effusion specimens.

METHODS

This retrospective study comprised a cohort of 229 cytology specimens, including 211 effusion fluid and 18 fine-needle aspiration specimens. Cytologic categories included 134 carcinoma, 28 mesothelioma, 46 indefinite (suspicious and atypical), and 21 benign. Cell block sections were stained for claudin-4 and compared with those previously stained for MOC-31 and Ber-EP4. Indefinite cases were further reclassified based on clinical and pathologic findings into benign (26 cases), mesothelioma (11 cases), and carcinoma (nine cases).

RESULTS

None of the mesotheliomas (0/39) or benign effusions (0/47) were positive for claudin-4, whereas 134 of the 143 carcinoma specimens were positive. Compared to MOC-31 and Ber-EP4, claudin-4 had the highest specificity and PPV (100% for each), followed by Ber-EP4. Claudin-4 showed high sensitivity (93.7%), albeit lower than MOC-31. MOC-31 had the lowest specificity and PPV but the highest sensitivity and NPV. Ber-EP4 had the lowest sensitivity (91.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Claudin-4 can be used as a single marker for carcinoma with high sensitivity and superior specificity compared with MOC-31 and Ber-EP4. Mesothelial lineage can be ruled out when claudin-4 is positive. In equivocal cytology samples with few scattered cells of interest, a panel of claudin-4 and Ber-EP4 results in the highest combined sensitivity and specificity.

Immunocytochemistry of effusion fluids: Introduction to SCIP approach

Due to the remarkably wide morphologic spectrum of reactive mesothelial cells, some of the effusion fluids may be difficult to interpret with objective certainty by cytomorphology alone. Cytomorphology of well to moderately differentiated adenocarcinomas (responsible for the bulk of malignant effusions) may overlap with floridly reactive mesothelial cells. Even mesotheliomas including diffuse malignant epithelioid mesothelioma, are usually cytomorphologically bland without unequivocal features of malignancy. The intensity of challenge depends on the interpreter's training or experience level, institutional demographics of patients (such as type of prevalent diseases, predominant sex and age group), technical support, and quality of cytopreparatory processing. In general immunocytochemistry is valuable adjunct to facilitate objective interpretation with or without other ancillary techniques as indicated. An increasing number of immunomarkers is further refining the contribution of immunohistochemistry to this field. However, application of immunohistochemistry to effusion fluids is relatively challenging because of many variables. Multiple factors such as delay after specimen collection, specimen processing related factors including fixation and storage; ambient conditions under which paraffin blocks are archived (for retrospective testing); antigen retrieval method; duration of antigen retrieval step; antibody clone and dilution; and antibody application time are identical to application of immunohistochemistry in other areas. The significant challenge related to the potential compromization of the immunoreactivity pattern due to exposure to non-formalin fixatives / reagents is also applicable to effusion fluid specimens. The immunoreactivity results would be compared and corelated with cumulative metadata based on the reported studies performed and validated on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue sections. Deviating from such protocols may lead to suboptimal results, which is not uncommon in clinical practice with potential compromization of patient care and related liability. Because of this, it is critical to perform immunocytochemistry on formalin-fixed cell-block sections only. In addition, unless the interpretation criteria for immunohistochemical evaluation of effusion fluids are not modified specifically, it may not be productive in resolving some challenging cases. However, this aspect is not well elaborated in the literature. A basic and critical challenge is finding and locating the cells of interest in cell-block sections of effusion fluids. A unique approach is to choose a fundamental immunopanel which highlight the mesothelial and inflammatory cells in reactive effusion fluids to create the basic map. This allows detection of a 'second-foreign' population which can be immunocharacterized further with the help of subtractive coordinate immunoreactivity pattern (SCIP) approach elaborated here.

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.

Application of multicolour flow cytometry in the detection of metastatic carcinoma in serous effusions: Special emphasis in atypical cytology

INTRODUCTION

We evaluated the role of simultaneous use of multiple antibodies in flow cytometry (FCM) to detect metastatic carcinomas in effusion samples.

METHODS

Cytological examination of 75 successive cases of effusion samples was performed. There were 48 peritoneal, 26 pleural and one pericardial fluid. Multi-coloured FCM examination was undertaken using a cocktail of CD45, CD14 and epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM), antibodies tagged with different fluorochromes. The percentage of EpCAM positivity was calculated in the CD45 and CD14 dual negative population by selective gating. The EpCAM value was correlated with the cytological findings, follow-up data and MOC-31 immunostaining.

RESULTS

There were 20 benign, 35 malignant and 20 atypical cases diagnosed on cytomorphology. The primary sources of carcinomas were mainly from the ovary, followed by lung, gall bladder, intestine and other areas. Out of 20 cytologically benign cases, there were two malignant cases on the final follow-up, and EpCAM on FCM picked up all 18 benign cases and one malignant case. Out of 35 cytologically detected malignant cases, EpCAM picked up 32 malignant cases. The EpCAM detected 15/18 malignant and both benign cases out of 20 cytological atypical cases. EpCAM antibody by FCM showed 87% sensitivity, 100% specificity, 100% positive predictive value and 74% negative predictive value.

CONCLUSION

This comprehensive study highlights the potential use of multi-coloured FCM along with cytological examination to diagnose metastatic carcinoma in effusion samples. Multi-coloured FCM is rapid and quantitative and is helpful in atypical cases.

The "Brescia panel" (Claudin-4 and BRCA-associated protein 1) in the differential diagnosis of mesotheliomas with epithelioid features versus metastatic carcinomas

BACKGROUND

The distinction between mesothelioma with epithelioid features and metastatic carcinoma may be challenging, particularly on cytology. A novel 2-hit Claudin-4 and BRCA-associated protein 1 (BAP1) panel was investigated.

METHODS

The objective of this study was to determine the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of the panel on cytology from pleural effusions and matched biopsies, including 49 malignant mesotheliomas on cytology with 43 matched biopsies, 49 normal/reactive mesothelial proliferations, and 49 pleural metastatic carcinomas from different primaries with 21 matched pleural biopsies. The diagnostic role of the 4 categories obtained by crossing the immunostaining results was analyzed.

RESULTS

Claudin-4 strongly stained all metastatic carcinomas and tested completely negative in normal mesothelium, benign reactive mesothelial hyperplasia, and malignant mesothelioma. All normal and benign mesothelial proliferations and all carcinomas except 1 were immunoreactive for BAP1, whereas BAP1 loss was observed in 88% of malignant mesotheliomas. The expression of Claudin-4 alone excluded all benign and malignant mesothelial growth, consistently characterizing all metastatic carcinomas. Double negativity was evident in all malignant mesotheliomas, and double positivity was observed in all metastatic carcinomas. BAP1-positive/Claudin-4-negative status was observed only in malignant mesotheliomas and benign mesothelial proliferations. A single metastatic anal squamous cell carcinoma had BAP1-negative/Claudin-4-positive staining.

CONCLUSIONS

Claudin-4 expression was completely specific and sensitive for metastatic carcinoma, excluding mesothelial proliferations. BAP1 staining characterized 98% of metastatic carcinomas and 100% of benign mesothelial proliferations, whereas negativity was observed almost exclusively in mesotheliomas. This 2-hit panel is probably the best compromise for differentiating malignant mesothelioma and metastatic carcinoma on either cytology or biopsy specimens.

Update on diagnosis and management of neoplastic pericardial disease

INTRODUCTION

Pericardial neoplasms are uncommon, mostly due to secondary involvement of the pericardium by extracardiac tumors. Clinical presentation is nonspecific, frequently leading to a delayed diagnosis. Moreover, both benign and malignant pericardial tumors may be associated with myocardial infiltration and mechanical compression of cardiac chambers, possibly precipitating clinical conditions. Pericardial tumors are indeed a diagnostic and therapeutic clinical challenge.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims to provide an overview of the main clinical characteristics of pericardial tumors, along with their management in clinical practice.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

Multimodality imaging (echocardiography, chest X-ray, CT, CMR, and PET) enable full characterization of pericardial neoplasms. An individualized strategy should be developed by a multidisciplinary team including cardiologists, oncologists, radiologists, and cardiac surgeons.

HEG1, BAP1, and MTAP are useful in cytologic diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma with effusion

BACKGROUND

The specificity and sensitivity of HEG1 for malignant mesothelioma (MM) is high. The use of BAP1/MTAP immunohistochemistry (IHC) is recommended to separate benign and malignant mesothelial proliferations. We determined how ancillary techniques can be used for the cytological diagnosis of MM with effusion.

METHODS

Cell blocks from effusions from cases with MM, reactive mesothelial cells (RMCs), and carcinomas were analyzed by IHC with HEG1, BAP1, and MTAP and with homozygous deletion (HD) of CDKN2A by fluorescence in situ hybridization. Staining scores were calculated for IHC by adding the number of categories for the staining intensity and the staining extension.

RESULTS

HEG1 was positive in all (41/41) MMs, but negative in carcinomas, except for ovarian carcinomas. Overall 76.9% (20/26) of RMCs and 28.6% (6/21) of ovarian carcinomas expressed HEG1. BAP1 loss was found in 71.1% of MMs, but none was found in RMCs. MTAP loss was found in 76.2% of MMs, but none was found in RMCs. 73.9% of MMs harbored HD of CDKN2A. There was concordance between loss of MTAP and HD of CDKN2A in 95% of MMs.

CONCLUSION

HEG1 is a good marker for mesothelial differentiation in effusion cytology. HD of CDKN2A is frequently observed in cell blocks from effusions of MMs, and MTAP IHC may act as a surrogate for HD of CDKN2A. Cell block analysis is recommended for effusions of unknown origins with the following methods: IHC with HEG1 and claudin 4 to validate the mesothelial origin, followed by BAP1 and MTAP IHC to confirm malignancy.

Claudin-4 shows superior specificity for mesothelioma vs non-small-cell lung carcinoma compared with MOC-31 and Ber-EP4

The distinction of malignant mesothelioma from non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) usually requires immunohistochemistry, but some broad-spectrum carcinoma markers stain mesotheliomas, and it remains unclear which broad-spectrum markers are most valuable for distinguishing these malignancies. Here, we directly compared the sensitivity and specificity of three broad-spectrum carcinoma markers, claudin-4, Ber-EP4, and MOC-31, for distinguishing NSCLC from mesothelioma. Immunohistochemistry was performed on tissue microarrays containing 68 epithelioid mesotheliomas, 31 sarcomatoid mesotheliomas, and 147 non-small-cell lung cancers (53 adenocarcinomas, 60 squamous cell carcinomas, 13 large-cell carcinomas, and 21 sarcomatoid carcinomas). For adenocarcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and large-cell carcinoma, claudin-4 staining was present in 103 of 126 cases (82%), MOC-31 staining was present in 112 of 126 cases (89%), and Ber-EP4 staining was present in 113 of 126 cases (90%); these values were not statistically different. Claudin-4 stained 0 of 68 (0%), MOC-31 stained 22 of 68 (32%), and Ber-EP4 stained 24 of 68 (35%) epithelioid mesotheliomas; thus, the specificities for NSCLC versus epithelioid mesothelioma were 100%, 68%, and 65%, respectively. Claudin-4 staining was present in 7 of 21 (33%), MOC-31 staining was present in 8 of 21 (38%), and Ber-EP4 staining was present in 5 of 21 (24%) sarcomatoid carcinomas. All three markers were negative in 12 of 21 (57%) sarcomatoid carcinomas. Sarcomatoid mesotheliomas were not stained with any of these markers. We conclude that claudin-4 has considerably greater specificity and comparable sensitivity to MOC-31 and Ber-EP4 for distinguishing NSCLC from epithelioid malignant mesothelioma. The use of all three markers may be necessary for sarcomatoid neoplasms, given their limited sensitivity.

Utility of Claudin-4 versus BerEP4 and B72.3 in pleural fluids with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Lung adenocarcinoma (LADC) is the most common occult primary in patients presenting with a malignant pleural effusion. Distinguishing metastatic LADC from reactive mesothelial cells (RMC) and malignant mesothelioma (MM) based on morphology alone has been a persistent diagnostic challenge in cytopathology. Claudin-4, a major functional constituent of tight junctions, has been shown to help distinguish LADC from RMC and MM in surgical specimens. Our goal was to further validate and assess the utility of Claudin-4 in comparison to BerEP4 and B72.3 in malignant effusions with a focus on metastatic LADC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We evaluated 58 pleural effusions (40 LADC, 10 RCM, and 8 MM). Immunohistochemistry was performed using Claudin-4, Ber-EP4, and B72.3 on cell blocks. Staining patterns, quantity of tumor cells, and intensity of staining (weak, moderate, or strong) were assessed.

RESULTS

All cases of LADC were positive for Claudin-4 with an overall sensitivity of 100% (40 of 40) and specificity of 100% (18 of 18). In addition, Claudin-4 showed the highest quantity and quality of staining with 3+ staining intensity in 73% (29 of 40) of cases, compared with 35% (14 of 40) of cases using BerEP4 and 52% (21 of 40) of cases using B72.3. The sensitivity and specificity for BerEP4 were 90% and 78%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity for B72.3 were 87.5% and 100%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, Claudin-4 performed superiorly compared to BerEP4 and B72.3 in distinguishing lung adenocarcinoma from RMC or MM in pleural effusions. Our results show Claudin-4 is a useful marker for distinguishing RMC and MM from lung adenocarcinoma, with high sensitivity (100%) and specificity (100%), compatible with studies shown in the literature.

Epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) from pleural fluid cell lysates is a highly accurate diagnostic biomarker of adenocarcinomatous effusions

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The discovery of highly accurate pleural fluid (PF) biomarkers of malignancy remains elusive. We assessed the operating characteristics of the PF epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM), claudin 4 (CL4) and human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) as potential markers of epithelial malignancies.

METHODS

The three markers were quantified by immunoassays in the supernatants (s) and cell lysates (cl) of 175 PF samples. The cut-off values with 100% specificity were selected for malignant-benign discrimination. An immunocytochemical staining index score for each marker was also evaluated on PF cell blocks. The resulting best biomarker was further validated in two independent populations of 73 and 48 patients with pleural effusions (PE).

RESULTS

An EpCAM(cl) >98 pg/g total lysate protein yielded 75% sensitivity, 100% specificity, negative likelihood ratio of 0.25 and area under the curve of 0.94 for labelling adenocarcinomatous effusions. Sensitivity reached 88% if EpCAM(cl) was combined with EpCAM immunostaining. One-third or more of the malignant effusions exhibiting a false-negative cytological fluid examination were correctly classified by EpCAM(cl) concentrations. Immunoassays for CL4 and HE4 were diagnostically useless.

CONCLUSION

EpCAM(cl) is a new biomarker of adenocarcinomatous PE with meaningful discriminating properties.

Glypican-1 immunohistochemistry does not separate mesothelioma from pulmonary adenocarcinoma

Immunohistochemistry (IHC) is used to help differentiate pleural mesothelioma from pulmonary adenocarcinoma in pleural biopsies and cytology specimens of pleural effusions due to overlapping morphologic features between these two malignancies. The aim of this study is to evaluate IHC glypican-1, a recently proposed marker for epithelioid mesothelioma, in our cohort of mesotheliomas and pulmonary adenocarcinoma. Tissue microarrays with duplicate cores from 33 cases of mesotheliomas (28 epithelioid type and five sarcomatoid type) and 21 cases of pulmonary adenocarcinoma were stained with glypican-1 antibody. The proportion of cases by tumor type showing staining with glypican-1 and the H-score for each tumor type were evaluated. All 33 cases of mesothelioma and all 20 cases of pulmonary adenocarcinoma with interpretable cores showed positive cytoplasmic staining. All but one case of mesothelioma and all pulmonary adenocarcinomas showed staining in at least 80% of the tumor cells. The mean H-score for glypican-1 of mesothelioma (134 ± 59, mean ± SD) was not significantly different from that for pulmonary adenocarcinoma (156 ± 60; P = 0.21). Neither epithelioid type (mean H-score 135 ± 57) nor sarcomatoid type (mean H-score 130 ± 78) of mesothelioma showed different H-scores when compared to pulmonary adenocarcinoma (P = 0.23 and 0.42, respectively). In conclusion, glypican-1 IHC does not differentiate mesothelioma from pulmonary adenocarcinoma.

The pathological and molecular diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma: a literature review

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), an asbestos-induced tumor, represents significant diagnostic challenges for pathologists. Its histological diagnosis is stepwise and should be based on morphological assessment, supported by clinical and radiological findings, and supplemented with immunohistochemistry (IHC) and, more recently, molecular tests. The main diagnostic dilemmas are the differential diagnoses with benign mesothelial proliferations and other pleural malignant tumors. The present review is an update regarding the morphological, immunohistochemical, and molecular features with respect to MPM diagnosis. Data sources include a survey of the biomedical literature from PubMed (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed) and textbooks focusing on the pathological diagnosis of MPM and associated immunohistochemical and molecular markers. The histological findings of MPM could facilitate its diagnosis and provide important prognostic information. The immunohistochemical approach should rest on the application of a panel including positive (mesothelial-related) and negative markers with greater than 80% sensitivity and specificity, which need to be selected based on morphology and clinical information. Moreover, in challenging cases, fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) testing for the p16 deletion and IHC to evaluate the loss of BRCA1-associated protein 1 (BAP1) expression could be useful in distinguishing benign from malignant pleural proliferations.

Guidelines for Pathologic Diagnosis of Malignant Mesothelioma 2017 Update of the Consensus Statement From the International Mesothelioma Interest Group

CONTEXT

- Malignant mesothelioma (MM) is an uncommon tumor that can be difficult to diagnose.

OBJECTIVE

- To provide updated, practical guidelines for the pathologic diagnosis of MM.

DATA SOURCES

- Pathologists involved in the International Mesothelioma Interest Group and others with an interest and expertise in the field contributed to this update. Reference material included up-to-date, peer-reviewed publications and textbooks.

CONCLUSIONS

- There was discussion and consensus opinion regarding guidelines for (1) distinguishing benign from malignant mesothelial proliferations (both epithelioid and spindle cell lesions), (2) cytologic diagnosis of MM, (3) recognition of the key histologic features of pleural and peritoneal MM, (4) use of histochemical and immunohistochemical stains in the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of MM, (5) differentiating epithelioid MM from various carcinomas (lung, breast, ovarian, and colonic adenocarcinomas, and squamous cell and renal cell carcinomas), (6) diagnosis of sarcomatoid MM, (7) use of molecular markers in the diagnosis of MM, (8) electron microscopy in the diagnosis of MM, and (9) some caveats and pitfalls in the diagnosis of MM. Immunohistochemical panels are integral to the diagnosis of MM, but the exact makeup of panels employed is dependent on the differential diagnosis and on the antibodies available in a given laboratory. Depending on the morphology, immunohistochemical panels should contain both positive and negative markers for mesothelial differentiation and for lesions considered in the differential diagnosis. Immunohistochemical markers should have either sensitivity or specificity greater than 80% for the lesions in question. Interpretation of positivity generally should take into account the localization of the stain (eg, nuclear versus cytoplasmic) and the percentage of cells staining (>10% is suggested for cytoplasmic and membranous markers). Selected molecular markers are now being used to distinguish benign from malignant mesothelial proliferations. These guidelines are meant to be a practical diagnostic reference for the pathologist; however, some new pathologic predictors of prognosis and response to therapy are also included.

Claudin-targeted drug development using anti-claudin monoclonal antibodies to treat hepatitis and cancer

The 27-member family of tetraspan membrane proteins known as claudins (CLDNs) is a major component of tight junctions. A series of studies elucidating the relationship between CLDNs and various pathological conditions has provided new insights into drug development. For instance, CLDN-1 may be a potent target for epidermal absorption of drugs and for treating hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. CLDN-4 may be a target for treating cancer. Because CLDNs are also expressed in various normal tissues, safety and efficacy evaluations are critical for translational research. We previously developed several anti-CLDN antibodies and have established proof of concept for CLDN-targeted drug development using these reagents. Here, we provide an overview of CLDN-1 as a target for improving epidermal drug absorption and preventing HCV infection and of CLDN-4 as a target for anticancer therapeutics.

Utility and pitfalls of immunohistochemistry in the differential diagnosis between epithelioid mesothelioma and poorly differentiated lung squamous cell carcinoma

AIMS

The aims of this study were to clarify the usefulness of immunohistochemistry in the differential diagnosis of epithelioid mesothelioma with a solid growth pattern [solid epithelioid mesothelioma (SEM)] and poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma (PDSCC), and to confirm the validity of a specific type of antibody panel. Additionally, we aimed to clarify the pitfalls of immunohistochemical analyses.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded specimens from 36 cases of SEM and 38 cases of PDSCC were immunohistochemically examined for calretinin, podoplanin (D2-40), Wilms' tumour gene product (WT1), cytokeratin (CK) 5/6, p40, p63, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), epithelial-related antigen (MOC31), claudin-4, thyroid transcription factor-1 (TTF-1), and napsin A. WT1 showed the highest diagnostic accuracy (85.1%) as a mesothelial marker, and CEA, p40 and claudin-4 showed higher diagnostic accuracies (95.9%, 94.6%, and 93.2%, respectively) as carcinoma markers. Calretinin (diagnostic accuracy: 75.7%), D2-40 (diagnostic accuracy: 67.6%), CK5/6 (diagnostic accuracy: 63.5%), TTF-1 (diagnostic accuracy: 55.4%) and napsin A (diagnostic accuracy: 52.7%) could not differentiate between SEM and PDSCC. Among these markers, the combination of calretinin and WT1 showed the highest diagnostic accuracy (86.5%) as a positive marker, and the combination of p40 and CEA showed the highest diagnostic accuracy (97.3%) as a negative marker. The combination of CEA and claudin-4 also showed relatively high diagnostic accuracy (94.6%) as a negative marker.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend the combination of WT1 and calretinin as a positive maker, and the combination of CEA and claudin-4 as a negative marker, for differential diagnoses of SEM and PDSCC.

Flow Cytometry of Nonhematopoietic Neoplasms

Many epithelial neoplasms can be analyzed by flow cytometry (FC), particularly from serous cavity effusion samples, using EpCAM, a cell adhesion molecule expressed on most normal epithelial cells and expressed at a higher level in most epithelial neoplasms. A simple 3-color flow cytometric panel can provide a high sensitivity and specificity compared to cytomorphology. FC provides more rapid immunophenotyping than conventional immunohistochemical staining, can identify rare malignant cells that could be missed by a cytological exam alone, and can be utilized to evaluate limited samples such as cerebrospinal fluid or fine-needle aspiration samples. Flow cytometric analysis for epithelial antigens can be combined with DNA ploidy analysis or assessment of the nucleus-to-cytoplasm ratio. Panels of flow cytometric markers are useful for the assessment of pediatric nonhematopoietic neoplasms, including neuroblastomas, primitive neuroectodermal tumors, Wilms' tumor, rhabdomyosarcomas, germ cell tumors, and hemangiopericytomas, as well as small-round-blue-cell tumors in adults, including small-cell carcinomas.

Diagnostic Usefulness of Claudin-3 and Claudin-4 for Immunocytochemical Differentiation between Metastatic Adenocarcinoma Cells and Reactive Mesothelial Cells in Effusion Cell Blocks

OBJECTIVE

Claudin-3 and claudin-4 have recently been reported as promising targets for the detection and diagnosis of cancer. This study was designed to evaluate the diagnostic value of claudin-3 and claudin-4 immunoreactivity to distinguish metastatic adenocarcinoma cells (MAC) from reactive mesothelial cells (RMC) in effusions.

STUDY DESIGN

Claudin-3 and claudin-4 immunocytochemical staining was performed on 234 cell block specimens, including 194 malignant effusions with MAC and 40 benign effusions with RMC. Any degree of membranous staining was considered positive.

RESULTS

Claudin-3 was positive in 190 (97.9%) out of 194 cases with MAC and in 3 (7.5%) out of 40 cases with RMC. Claudin-4 immunoreactivity was seen in all 194 (100%) cases with MAC and in 11 (27.5%) out of 40 cases with RMC. In all claudin-3- or claudin-4-positive RMC samples, the area of positive staining was <25% of the cells. Claudin-3 and claudin-4 efficiently discriminated between MAC and RMC (p < 0.001 for both), and claudin-3 was more specific than claudin-4 in differentiating between MAC and RMC (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that claudin-3 and claudin-4 are good candidates to be included as MAC markers in the panel of antibodies to distinguish MAC from RMC in effusion specimens.

The Third Italian Consensus Conference for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: State of the art and recommendations

Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (MPM) remains a relevant public health issue, and asbestos exposure is the most relevant risk factor. The incidence has considerably and constantly increased over the past two decades in the industrialized countries and is expected to peak in 2020-2025. In Italy, a standardized-rate incidence in 2011 among men was 3.5 and 1.25 per 100,000 in men and women, respectively, and wide differences are noted among different geographic areas. The disease remains challenging in terms of diagnosis, staging and treatment and an optimal strategy has not yet been clearly defined. The Third Italian Multidisciplinary Consensus Conference on Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma was held in Bari (Italy) in January 30-31, 2015. This Consensus has provided updated recommendations on the MPM management for health institutions, clinicians and patients.

2015 update on the diagnosis and management of neoplastic pericardial disease

The best approach in diagnosis and treatment of neoplastic pericardial disease has not been defined yet. The authors report the most recent literature about the new diagnostic techniques that are useful to improve the diagnosis. The literature about the therapeutic options is critically reviewed, in order to give suggestions of use to the clinical practice. Pericardial effusion may require urgent drainage; the solid component, however, becomes predominant in some cases. Neoplastic pericardial disease should be assessed following oncologic criteria evaluation of the neoplastic burden; outcome classified as complete or partial response, stable or progressive disease and - in cases with progression - event-free survival. Systemic chemotherapy may be effective in lymphomas and possibly in breast carcinomas. Intrapericardial chemotherapy with systemic chemotherapy is the treatment of choice in lung cancer. Pericardial window with systemic chemotherapy is also effective in preventing the accumulation of large amount of fluid.

Claudin 3, 4, and 15 expression in solid tumors of lung adenocarcinoma versus malignant pleural mesothelioma

Epithelioid malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) can easily be confused with lung adenocarcinomas (ACAs). In serous effusion, claudin (cldn) 3 is shown to be useful in the diagnosis of mesothelioma vs ACAs. Cldn15 is reported to be overexpressed in epithelioid mesothelioma and absent in human airway epithelium. The aim was to assess the value of cldn3 and cldn4 compared to that of BerEp4 and thyroid transcription factor-1 (TTF1) in differentiating lung ACA from epithelioid MPM and to examine the expression of cldn15 in these tumors. The expression of cldn3, cldn4, cldn15, BerEp4, and TTF1 was examined by immunohistochemistry in a total of 62 human specimen including 28 epithelioid MPMs and 34 ACAs of the lung. In lung ACA, cldn4 was strongly expressed in all 34 (100%) specimens followed by cldn3 in 33 (97%) of 34. BerEp4 was expressed in 32 (94.1%) of 34. TTF1 reacted for only 20 (58.82%) of 34 cases of lung ACA. In MPM specimens, the expression of cldn3 and4 as well as that of TTF1 was completely absent. In contrast, BerEp4 was focally expressed in 5 (17.85%) of 28 cases of epithelioid MPM. Cldn15 was strongly expressed in 53% pf epithelioid MPMs but also in 50% of lung ACAs. Its expression was moderate in normal pleura and limited in normal lung. Cldn3 and cldn4 appear to be the best performing carcinoma markers in discriminating lung ACA from mesothelioma compared with BerEp4 and TTF1. There is no differential expression of cldn15 between the 2 pathologies. However, the limited cldn15 expression in normal tissues and high expression in tumors make it an attractive candidate for cancer therapy.

Utility of Immunohistochemistry in the Diagnosis of Pleuropulmonary and Mediastinal Cancers: A Review and Update

Context

Immunohistochemistry has become an indispensable ancillary tool for the accurate classification of pleuropulmonary and mediastinal neoplasms necessary for therapeutic decisions and predicting prognostic outcome in the era of personalized medicine. Diagnostic accuracy has significantly improved because of the continuous discoveries of tumor-associated biomarkers and the development of effective immunohistochemical panels.

Objective

To increase the accuracy of diagnosis and classify pleuropulmonary neoplasms through immunohistochemistry.

Data Sources

Literature review, authors' research data, and personal practice experience.

Conclusions

This review article has shown that appropriately selecting immunohistochemical panels enables pathologists to effectively diagnose most primary pleuropulmonary neoplasms and differentiate primary lung tumors from a variety of metastatic tumors to the lung. The discovery of new mutation-specific antibodies identifying a subset of specific gene-arranged lung tumors provides a promising alternative and cost-effective approach to molecular testing. Knowing the utilities and pitfalls of each tumor-associated biomarker is essential to avoiding potential diagnostic errors.

Use of circulating tumor cell technology (CELLSEARCH) for the diagnosis of malignant pleural effusions

RATIONALE

Cytological analysis of pleural effusions (PEs) has a sensitivity of approximately 60%. We hypothesized that the CELLSEARCH technology (Janssen Research and Development, Huntingdon Valley, PA) currently used to detect circulating tumor cells could be adapted for the identification of tumor cells in PEs.

METHODS

This was a single-center, prospective, observational study. Pleural fluid from subjects with undiagnosed PEs were analyzed by CELLSEARCH technology, which uses an epithelial cell adhesion molecule antibody-based capture system/cytokeratin antibodies to identify tumor cells. Subjects were prospectively monitored by periodic chart review to determine the etiology of the PE.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

One hundred thirty-two subjects were analyzed. A malignant etiology was established in 81 subjects. The median number of "positive" pleural epithelial cells (PECs) detected per milliliter of pleural fluid was 6 in the benign group. The number of PECs was 52 in the malignant nonepithelial group (NS) and 526 in the malignant epithelial group (P < 0.001). Unlike blood, there was a baseline number of "positive" cells in benign pleural fluids; however, any cutoff greater than 852 positive cells/ml had 100% specificity. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.86. Nine percent of our cancer cases had high numbers of PECs (>280/ml) but a negative or nondefinitive cancer diagnosis by cytology.

CONCLUSIONS

The pleural CELLSEARCH assay may serve as a valuable addition to traditional cytology and provide useful information regarding the diagnosis of malignant effusions. Major advantages include that it is well standardized, relatively inexpensive, has a rapid turnaround, and is easily available. Our data support the conduct of additional studies of this approach to assist in the diagnosis of malignant PEs.

Diagnostic value of claudin-4 marker in pleural and peritoneal effusion cytology: Does it differentiate between metastatic adenocarcinoma and reactive mesothelial cells?

BACKGROUND

Several markers have been used to make a distinction between metastatic adenocarcinoma and reactive mesothelial cells in the body cavity effusions. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of claudin-4 marker in making such a distinction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, a total of 92 pleural/peritoneol effusions have been studied, including 47 cases of definite metastatic carcinoma and 45 cases of reactive mesothelium, and definitely negative for malignancy. Specimens were collected from patients; cell block samples were derived and used for immunohistochemical staining. The antibody used for immunohistochemical labeling was monoclonal anti-claudin-4. In the evaluation, membrane-bound reactivity was considered as significant and positive cases were defined when at least more than 10% of tumor cells were distinctly labeled.

RESULTS

Claudin-4 protein was positive in 40 specimens of metastatic carcinoma, while none of the cases of reactive mesothelium stained with the marker. This was not detected in the mesothelial cells, though. Positive staining for claudin-4 was significantly more frequent in metastatic carcinoma than in the reactive mesothelium (P > 0.0001). The sensitivity and specificity of claudin-4 to distinguish reactive mesothelium from metastatic carcinoma were 85% (95% confidence interval [CI], 71.1-93.8%) and 100% (95% CI, 91.1-100%), respectively. Furthermore, negative likelihood ratio was 0.15 (95% CI, 0.08-0.29).

CONCLUSION

The results of this study demonstrated that claudin-4 is less frequently expressed in reactive mesothelium. Thus, this claudin may be helpful in differentiating metastatic carcinoma from reactive mesothelial cells in pleural and peritoneal fluid cytology specimen.

Tight junction physiology of pleural mesothelium

Pleura consists of visceral and parietal cell layers, producing a fluid, which is necessary for lubrication of the pleural space. Function of both mesothelial cell layers is necessary for the regulation of a constant pleural fluid volume and composition to facilitate lung movement during breathing. Recent studies have demonstrated that pleural mesothelial cells show a distinct expression pattern of tight junction proteins which are known to ubiquitously determine paracellular permeability. Most tight junction proteins provide a sealing function to epithelia, but some have been shown to have a paracellular channel function or ambiguous properties. Here we provide an in-depth review of the current knowledge concerning specific functional contribution of these proteins determining transport and barrier function of pleural mesothelium.

Claudin-4 immunohistochemistry is highly effective in distinguishing adenocarcinoma from malignant mesothelioma in effusion cytology

BACKGROUND

Adenocarcinoma can be challenging to distinguish from malignant mesothelioma in effusions, and this distinction often requires ancillary studies and clinical correlation. Immunohistochemistry for claudin-4, a tight-junction-associated protein, has recently been shown to distinguish adenocarcinoma from malignant mesothelioma, mostly in surgical specimens. Our aim was to validate and assess the immunoreactivity profile of claudin-4 in a large series of malignant effusions.

METHODS

We evaluated 159 malignant effusions (84 adenocarcinomas and 75 malignant mesotheliomas). Claudin-4 immunohistochemistry was performed on cell-block paraffin sections and scored for staining intensity, staining pattern (cytoplasmic versus membranous), and percentage of positive tumor cells. Appropriate positive and negative controls were used throughout.

RESULTS

All cases of mesothelioma were negative for claudin-4 (0 of 64). Eighty-three of 84 cases of adenocarcinoma were positive (99%); 1 case of serous carcinoma was negative. Most adenocarcinomas showed strong and diffuse membranous staining (71 of 84; 84%); 12 cases (14%) showed membranous staining of moderate intensity. The overall sensitivity for adenocarcinoma was 99% (83 of 84).

CONCLUSIONS

Claudin-4 immunohistochemistry effectively distinguishes adenocarcinoma from malignant mesothelioma with high sensitivity and specificity in the evaluation of malignant effusions.

Claudin-4 as a marker for distinguishing malignant mesothelioma from lung carcinoma and serous adenocarcinoma

We compared claudin-4 with Ber-EP4 and carcinoembryonic antigen as markers to distinguish mesothelioma from lung adenocarcinoma, poorly differentiated lung squamous cell carcinoma, and serous adenocarcinoma of the uterus or ovary. All mesothelioma specimens were negative for claudin-4, but 3 of 18 specimens were focally positive for Ber-EP4. In contrast, lung adenocarcinoma including poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma was highly positive for claudin-4, but expression of Ber-EP4 and carcinoembryonic antigen varied widely. Claudin-4 in poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma had a lower positive expression rate than in adenocarcinoma. Granular claudin-4 immunoreactivity was conspicuous in poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma; this immunoreactive pattern was also observed in mesothelioma. Claudin-4 was thus considered very useful marker for distinguishing mesothelioma and adenocarcinoma, even if histological specimens are small, as in biopsies that contain limited numbers of tumor cells. However, it should be mentioned that claudin-4 has a limit in discrimination between squamous cell carcinoma from mesothelioma.

A simplified flow cytometric immunophenotyping procedure for the diagnosis of effusions caused by epithelial malignancies

Epithelial malignancies frequently metastasize to the serous cavities and result in symptomatic effusions. Cytology has high specificity but moderate sensitivity for the diagnosis of a malignant effusion. We developed and validated a simple, rapid, 3-color flow cytometric panel using the adhesion molecule Ber-EP4 to detect epithelial cells in effusions. One hundred ninety-five consecutive benign and malignant effusions received for routine cytologic examination were analyzed. Eighty-three fluid specimens were benign and 76 were malignant as judged by follow-up data. Ber-EP4-positive cells were detected with flow cytometry in 89.3% of malignant effusions. The sensitivity and specificity of flow cytometry was 88.15% and 97.64% compared with 73.68% and 100% on cytologic examination alone for the presence of a malignant effusion. Flow cytometry is a useful adjunct to cytology for the diagnosis of a malignant effusion and is particularly useful if the cytologic diagnosis is atypical/suspicious or if the cytologic preparations are hypocellular or hemorrhagic.

Value of PAX8, PAX2, claudin-4, and h-caldesmon immunostaining in distinguishing peritoneal epithelioid mesotheliomas from serous carcinomas

Distinguishing between peritoneal epithelioid mesotheliomas and papillary serous carcinomas involving the peritoneum can be difficult on routine histological preparations, but this differential diagnosis can be facilitated by the use of immunohistochemistry. Recent investigations have indicated that PAX8, PAX2, claudin-4, and h-caldesmon are immunohistochemical markers that can assist in distinguishing between these two malignancies; however, much of the information published on the value of these markers is either insufficient or contradictory. The purpose of this study is to resolve some of the existing controversies and to fully determine the practical value of these markers for assisting in the differential diagnosis between peritoneal mesotheliomas and serous carcinomas. In order to do so, a total of 40 peritoneal epithelioid mesotheliomas and 45 serous carcinomas (15 primary, 30 metastatic to the peritoneum) were investigated. PAX8 and PAX2 nuclear positivity was demonstrated in 42 (93%) and 25 (56%) of the serous carcinomas, respectively, whereas none of the mesotheliomas expressed either marker. Forty-four (98%) of the serous carcinomas exhibited claudin-4 reactivity along the cell membrane, whereas none of the mesotheliomas were positive for this marker. All of the serous carcinomas and mesotheliomas were negative for h-caldesmon. Based on these results, it is concluded that PAX8 and claudin-4 have a higher sensitivity and specificity for assisting in discriminating between peritoneal epithelioid mesotheliomas and serous carcinomas when compared with all of the other positive carcinoma markers that are, at present, recommended to be included in the immunohistochemical panels used in this differential diagnosis. Even though it is highly specific, PAX2 has little practical value in the diagnosis of peritoneal epithelioid mesotheliomas as its sensitivity is low. The h-caldesmon is not useful.

Claudins and alveolar epithelial barrier function in the lung

The alveolar epithelium of the lung constitutes a unique interface with the outside environment. This thin barrier must maintain a surface for gas transfer while being continuously exposed to potentially hazardous environmental stimuli. Small differences in alveolar epithelial barrier properties could therefore have a large impact on disease susceptibility or outcome. Moreover, recent work has focused attention on the alveolar epithelium as central to several lung diseases, including acute lung injury and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Although relatively little is known about the function and regulation of claudin tight junction proteins in the lung, new evidence suggests that environmental stimuli can influence claudin expression and alveolar barrier function in human disease. This review considers recent advances in the understanding of the role of claudins in the breakdown of the alveolar epithelial barrier in disease and in epithelial repair.

Adenocarcinoma cells in effusion cytology as a diagnostic pitfall with potential impact on clinical management: a case report with brief review of immunomarkers

Distinguishing metastatic carcinoma cells from reactive mesothelial cells in effusion samples is often challenging based on morphology alone. Metastatic carcinoma cells in fluid samples may mimic reactive mesothelial cells due to overlapping cytological features. We report a case of a pleural effusion in a 51-year-old female patient with a medical history significant for bilateral ovarian tumors and peritoneal implants diagnosed as serous tumor of borderline malignant potential. The effusion was composed almost entirely of adenocarcinoma cells that morphologically mimicked reactive mesothelial cells. The diagnosis of metastatic adenocarcinoma was made after a wide immunostaining panel of antibodies. Recognizing metastatic adenocarcinoma cells in effusion samples can be challenging and an accurate diagnosis may have significant impact on clinical management as demonstrated by this case.

Application of immunohistochemistry in the diagnosis of epithelioid mesothelioma: a review and update

A large number of immunohistochemical markers that can assist in the differential diagnosis of epithelioid mesotheliomas are currently available. Because these markers are expressed differently in the various types of carcinomas that can metastasize to the serosal membranes and can potentially be confused with epithelioid mesothelioma, their selection for inclusion in a diagnostic panel largely depends on the differential diagnosis, as well as on which ones work the best in a given laboratory. Traditionally, the panels used in the differential diagnosis of epithelioid mesothelioma have consisted of a combination of positive mesothelioma markers and broad-spectrum carcinoma markers. At present, a wide variety of organ-associated carcinoma markers such as thyroid transcription factor-1 and napsin A for the lung, PAX 8 and PAX 2 for the kidney, and Müllerian-derived tumors; gross cystic disease fluid protein-15 and mammaglobin for the breast; and CDX2 for intestinal differentiation are available, which can assist in establishing the site of origin of an adenocarcinoma when included in a diagnostic panel. This article provides updated information on the composition of the panels of markers recommended in the various differential diagnoses.

Guidelines for pathologic diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma: 2012 update of the consensus statement from the International Mesothelioma Interest Group

CONTEXT

Malignant mesothelioma (MM) is an uncommon tumor that can be difficult to diagnose.

OBJECTIVE

To provide updated practical guidelines for the pathologic diagnosis of MM.

DATA SOURCES

Pathologists involved in the International Mesothelioma Interest Group and others with an interest in the field contributed to this update. Reference material includes peer-reviewed publications and textbooks.

CONCLUSIONS

There was consensus opinion regarding (1) distinction of benign from malignant mesothelial proliferations (both epithelioid and spindle cell lesions), (2) cytologic diagnosis of MM, (3) key histologic features of pleural and peritoneal MM, (4) use of histochemical and immunohistochemical stains in the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of MM, (5) differentiation of epithelioid MM from various carcinomas (lung, breast, ovarian, and colonic adenocarcinomas, and squamous cell and renal cell carcinomas), (6) diagnosis of sarcomatoid mesothelioma, (7) use of molecular markers in the diagnosis of MM, (8) electron microscopy in the diagnosis of MM, and (9) some caveats and pitfalls in the diagnosis of MM. Immunohistochemical panels are integral to the diagnosis of MM, but the exact makeup of panels used is dependent on the differential diagnosis and on the antibodies available in a given laboratory. Immunohistochemical panels should contain both positive and negative markers. It is recommended that immunohistochemical markers have either sensitivity or specificity greater than 80% for the lesions in question. Interpretation of positivity generally should take into account the localization of the stain (eg, nuclear versus cytoplasmic) and the percentage of cells staining (>10% is suggested for cytoplasmic membranous markers). These guidelines are meant to be a practical reference for the pathologist.

Epithelial-mesenchymal transition in ovarian carcinoma

Ovarian cancer is the most lethal gynecologic malignancy, with the majority of patients dying within 5 years of diagnosis. This poor survival of patients diagnosed with this malignancy is attributed to diagnosis at advanced stage, when the tumor has metastasized, and to chemotherapy resistance, either primary or developing along tumor progression. However, ovarian carcinomas, constituting the vast majority of ovarian cancers, additionally have unique biology, one aspect of which is the ability to co-express epithelial and mesenchymal determinants. epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT), a physiological process by which mesenchymal cells are formed and migrate to target organs during embryogenesis, is involved in cancer cell invasion and metastasis. However, these changes do not fully occur in ovarian carcinoma, and are even reversed in tumor cells present in malignant peritoneal and pleural effusions. This review summarizes current knowledge in this area, including the characteristics of EMT related to adhesion, transcriptional regulation and chemoresistance, and their clinical relevance, as well as the recently observed regulation of EMT by microRNA.