Pleural mesothelioma of epithelial type and pulmonary adenocarcinoma: an ultrastructural and cytochemical comparison

Peritoneal Mesothelioma-An Update

A remarkable amount of new information has been generated on peritoneal mesothelioma (PeM), ranging from nomenclature changes, including the removal of "malignant" when referring to this neoplasm and the use of the term "tumor" rather than "mesothelioma" to designate the neoplasm formerly known as "well-differentiated papillary mesothelioma", to the acknowledgment that PeMs can be associated with tumor predisposition syndromes or germline mutations. Although the disease is still more frequently seen in caucasian males, PeM is not uncommon in women. In addition, it can represent a diagnostic challenge when it has an uncommon presentation (ie, paraneoplastic syndrome or incidental finding) or when it has confounding histologic features. Ancillary testing, including immunohistochemical stains, in situ hybridization for CDKN2A or NF2 , and molecular studies, in selected cases, allows its correct diagnosis. The molecular landscape of PeM is still a work in progress; however, some findings, such as ALK gene rearrangements and EWSR1/FUS-ATF1 fusions, are specifically seen in PeM of young patients. The biological behavior of PeM is variable; however, cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy have markedly improved the survival of patients affected by this disease.

Pathogenesis of malignant pleural mesothelioma and the role of environmental and genetic factors

BACKGROUND

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare and aggressive tumor for which no effective therapy exists despite the discovery of many possible molecular and genetic targets. The late stage of MPM diagnosis and the long latency that exist between some exposures and diagnosis have made it difficult to comprehensively evaluate the role of risk factors and their downstream molecular effects.

METHODS

This manuscript is a review of current literature about the pathogenesis of malignant mesothelioma. In this overview, current published studies concerning pathogenesis of malignant mesothelioma are reviewed, with insights into its etiology and pathogenesis. We searched pubmed using the following subjects: mesothelioma, radiation, genetics, pediatric malignant mesothelioma, SV40 virus, and growth factors. We selected 350 valuable articles of which 152 sources were used to complete this review.

CONCLUSION

Many risk factors for MPM development have been recognized including environmental exposures, genetic susceptibility, viral contamination, and radiation. In this review, we discuss the current molecular and genetic contributors to MPM pathogenesis and the risk factors associated with these carcinogenic processes.

Pathogenesis of malignant pleural mesothelioma and the role of environmental and genetic factors

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare, aggressive tumor for which no effective therapy exists despite the discovery of many possible molecular and genetic targets. Many risk factors for MPM development have been recognized including environmental exposures, genetic susceptibility, viral contamination, and radiation. However, the late stage of MPM diagnosis and the long latency that exists between some exposures and diagnosis have made it difficult to comprehensively evaluate the role of risk factors and their downstream molecular effects. In this review, we discuss the current molecular and genetic contributors in MPM pathogenesis and the risk factors associated with these carcinogenic processes.

Immunohistochemical marker panels for distinguishing between epithelioid mesothelioma and lung adenocarcinoma

The distinction between epithelioid mesothelioma and lung adenocarcinoma remains an important diagnostic challenge for surgical pathologists. The aim of the present study was to select a limited and appropriate panel of antibodies that can differentiate between epithelioid mesothelioma and lung adenocarcinoma. Specimens of 90 epithelioid mesotheliomas and 51 lung adenocarcinomas obtained from Japanese cases were examined using calretinin, WT1, AE1/AE3, CAM5.2, cytokeratin (CK) 5/6, vimentin, epithelial membrane antigen (EMA), thrombomodulin, CEA, CA19-9, and CA125. Ninety-six percent of epithelioid mesotheliomas were positive for calretinin; 99% for WT1; 100% for AE1/AE; 97% for CAM5.2; 70% for CK 5/6; 91% for vimentin; 96% for EMA; 71% for thrombomodulin; 77% for mesothelin; 7% for CEA; 17% for CA19-9; and 85% for CA125. In contrast, 33% of lung adenocarcinomas were positive for calretinin; 16% for WT1; 100% for AE1/AE3, CAM5.2, and EMA; 41% for CK 5/6; 47% for vimentin; 20% for thrombomodulin; 69% for mesothelin; 98% for CEA; 73% for CA19-9; and 80% for CA125. For distinguishing between epithelioid mesothelioma and lung adenocarcinoma, the combination of CEA, calretinin and each WT1 or thrombomodulin was suggested to be the best panel of immunohistochemical markers.

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.

The immunohistochemical diagnosis of mesothelioma: a comparative study of epithelioid mesothelioma and lung adenocarcinoma

A large number of immunohistochemical markers that can facilitate the distinction between epithelioid pleural mesotheliomas and pulmonary peripheral adenocarcinomas have recently become available. The aim of this study is to compare the value of these new markers with others that are already commonly used for this purpose and to determine which are, at present, the best for discriminating between these malignancies. Sixty epithelioid mesotheliomas and 50 lung adenocarcinomas were investigated for expression of the following markers: calretinin, cytokeratin 5/6, WT1, thrombomodulin, mesothelin, CD44S, HBME-1, N-cadherin, E-cadherin, MOC-31, thyroid transcription factor-1 (TTF-1), BG-8 (Lewisy), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), Ber-EP4, B72.3 (TAG-72), leu-M1 (CD15), CA19-9, epithelial membrane antigen (EMA), and vimentin. All (100%) of the mesotheliomas reacted for calretinin, cytokeratin 5/6, and mesothelin, 93% for WT1, 93% for EMA, 85% for HBME-1, 77% for thrombomodulin; 73% for CD44S, 73% for N-cadherin, 55% for vimentin, 40% for E-cadherin, 18% for Ber-EP4, 8% for MOC-31, 7% for BG-8, and none for CEA, B72.3, leu-M1, TTF-1, or CA19-9. Of the adenocarcinomas, 100% were positive for MOC-31, Ber-EP4, and EMA, 96% for BG-8, 88% for CEA, 88% for E-cadherin, 84% for B72.3, 74% for TTF-1, 72% for leu-M1, 68% for HBME-1, 48% for CD44S, 48% for CA19-9, 38% for mesothelin, 38% for vimentin, 30% for N-cadherin, 14% for thrombomodulin, 8% for calretinin, 2% for cytokeratin 5/6, and none for WT1. After analyzing the results, it is concluded that calretinin, cytokeratin 5/6, and WT1 are the best positive markers for differentiating epithelioid malignant mesothelioma from pulmonary adenocarcinoma. The best discriminators among the antibodies considered to be negative markers for mesothelioma are CEA, MOC-31, Ber-EP4, BG-8, and B72.3. A panel of four markers (two positive and two negative) selected based upon availability and which ones yield good staining results in a given laboratory is recommended. Because of their specificity and sensitivity for mesotheliomas, the best combination appears to be calretinin and cytokeratin 5/6 (or WT1) for the positive markers and CEA and MOC-31 (or B72.3, Ber-EP4, or BG-8) for the negative markers. An extensive and detailed review of the literature is also provided.

Primary papillary serous carcinoma of the peritoneum in a man

BACKGROUND

Primary papillary serous carcinoma of the peritoneum is a well-known entity in women. The tumour is derived from the extraovarian mesothelium and the pelvis and lower abdomen mesothelia. The treatment strategies are similar to ovarian serous papillary carcinoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A case of primary serous papillary carcinoma of the peritoneum in a man is presented. The patient, 53 years old, died 2 months after diagnosis.

RESULTS

The histologic and immunohistochemical studies of the tumour will be presented. These studies, made during lifetime and at autopsy of the patient, confirm a diagnosis of primary serous papillary carcinoma of the peritoneum.

CONCLUSIONS

primary serous papillary carcinoma of the peritoneum can occur in men, and should be considered in the differential diagnosis in cases of abdominal carcinomatosis of unknown origin. Treatment options remain to be determined.

Value of morphometry, texture analysis, densitometry, and histometry in the differential diagnosis and prognosis of malignant mesothelioma

Malignant mesothelioma is a tumour with increasing incidence due to widespread use of its causative agent, asbestos, in the past decades. The poor survival necessitates a correct differentiation from other lesions at the same site, such as hyperplastic mesothelium and carcinomas metastatic to pleura or peritoneum. Since genetic and immunohistochemical markers are not absolutely differentiating, the diagnosis is based on the histology complemented with (immuno)histochemistry. However, as the tumour presents itself in numerous heterogeneous histological forms, visual evaluation is extremely difficult. In order to evaluate the prognostic and diagnostic performance of syntactic structure analysis (SSA), chromatin texture analysis, densitometry, and morphometry, an automated KNN-classification system has been used to compare Feulgen-stained tissue sections of hyperplastic mesothelium, malignant mesothelioma, and pulmonary adenocarcinoma. In addition, we also studied most discriminative aspects in the differentiation, typing, and prediction of survival. The results indicate that for the diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma, chromatin texture parameters outperform SSA, densitometry, and morphometry (recognition score=96.8 per cent). Most discriminative parameters highlight spatial patterns of the chromatin distribution that are hard to appraise visually and directly show the benefits of a quantitative approach. Typing of the tumour is best described by SSA parameters, relating to the spatial arrangement of the cells in the tissue (recognition score=94.9 per cent). In survival time classifications, chromatin texture yields the highest recognition score (82.9 per cent), although accurate estimations are unreliable due to a large degree of misclassification.

Cytopathology of malignant mesothelioma of the pleura in fine-needle aspiration biopsy

The cytologic findings in fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) of 9 histologically, immunohistochemically, and ultrastructurally confirmed malignant mesotheliomas of the pleura were reviewed. There were 4 epithelial malignant mesotheliomas (EMM), 3 sarcomatous mesotheliomas (SM), 1 mixed malignant mesothelioma (MMM), and 1 poorly differentiated malignant mesothelioma (PDMM). In FNAB, three EMMs yielded polygonal malignant cells with oval nuclei and prominent nucleoli, singly, in small sheets, and in tridimensional clusters with smooth or lobulated contours. In one EMM, only atypical mesothelial cells with prominent nucleoli were seen singly and in loose aggregates. In FNAB, two SM showed malignant spindle-shaped cells (MSC) with scant, ill-defined cytoplasm singly and in loose clusters. Cohesive clusters of elongated and polygonal cells with ill-defined, clear cytoplasm and pleomorphic nuclei containing small or prominent nucleoli were observed in one SM, with extensive clear-cell changes. In needle aspirates, the MMM showed polygonal malignant cells in clusters admixed with MSC. The PDMM displayed single and clustered large pleomorphic malignant cells, with prominent single or multiple nucleoli. Electron microscopic examination of minute tissue fragments retrieved from the FNAB in 2 cases of EMM revealed epithelial mesothelial cells with well-formed desmosomes and long slender microvilli (LSM) on the free tumor cell surfaces. In one case, LSM in direct contact with collagen fiber bundles in the tumor tissue matrix were observed, supporting the diagnosis of an invasive EMM. Diagn. Cytopathol. 1999;21:253-259.

Pseudomesotheliomatous carcinoma involving pleura and peritoneum: A clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical study of three cases

Pseudomesotheliomatous carcinoma is a rare variant of peripheral adenocarcinoma of the lung that can manifest clinical, radiologic, and pathologic features similar to malignant mesothelioma. We present three patients with pseudomesotheliomatous carcinoma of the lung. In one patient the carcinoma extended beyond the thorax and extensively involved the peritoneum, mesentery, omentum, and intestines. All patients experienced weight loss and chest pain. All were white men aged 63, 65, and 67 years. Two were smokers and had shortness of breath, cough, and pleural effusion. One had a history of asbestos exposure. No patient developed dyspnea or hemoptysis. One was successfully treated for prostatic carcinoma 18 months earlier. Radiographically, all tumors were pleura-based. Grossly, the tumors spread extensively over pleural (and in one case peritoneal) surfaces and mimicked malignant mesothelioma. Histologically, all tumors were poorly differentiated and necrotic; two tumors exhibited spindle-cell components and desmoplasia. Mucin production was detectable in none, 10%, and 50% of tumor cells. The percentages of tumor cells immunoreactive for Ber-EP4 were 70%, 100%, and 80%; for Leu MI 0%, 90%, and 50%; for epithelial membrane antigen 80%, 80%, and 100%; for B 72.3%, 0%, 90%, and 20%; for polyclonal carcinoembryonic antigen 0%, 10%, and 10%; and for monoclonal 5%, 0%, and 0%. Of these, Ber-EP4 and B 72.3 rendered the most reliable diagnostic results. The clinical, radiologic, and gross and routine histologic findings were similar to those of a malignant mesothelioma; the final diagnosis could be made based mainly on immunocytochemical results. We have reviewed the English and German literature regarding 65 such tumors and present our experience with three additional cases. We emphasize the application of immunocytochemical studies on pleura-based poorly or undifferentiated malignant tumors of unknown origin.

Ultrastructural features of diffuse malignant mesotheliomas

The distinction of malignant mesothelioma from tumors metastatic to the serosal membranes can often be made based on the results of histochemical or immunohistochemical studies. However, in some cases, these techniques are inadequate to make a firm diagnosis. In these instances, electron microscopic studies with the observation of a constellation of characteristic ultrastructural findings may permit an unequivocal diagnosis of mesothelioma.

Papillary serous carcinoma of the peritoneum in a man: a case report

BACKGROUND

Papillary serous carcinoma of the peritoneum (PSCP) is a rare primary peritoneal tumor, described exclusively in women. It is believed to arise from the secondary müllerian system, which is comprised of the pelvic and lower abdominal mesothelial lining and subjacent (subcoelomic) mesenchyme in women. Both mesotheliomas and PSCP arise from the coelomic epithelium, but are clinicopathologically and biologically distinct entities.

METHODS

The authors report clinicopathologic findings in a man, age 74 years, who died 3 months after the diagnosis of an extensive malignant abdominal disease.

RESULTS

The routine histologic and immunocytochemical studies of tumor tissue, obtained during the patient's lifetime and at autopsy, validated the unique occurrence of PSCP in a man.

CONCLUSIONS

This case illustrates that PSCP can occur in a man and that this diagnosis may be considered in the differential diagnosis of papillary serous tumors of the peritoneum in male patients. Although rare, PSCP is a diagnostically distinct entity the treatment of which is similar to ovarian serous tumors rather than mesotheliomas.

The value of antibodies 44-3A6, SM3, HBME-1, and thrombomodulin in differentiating epithelial pleural mesothelioma from lung adenocarcinoma: a comparative study with other commonly used antibodies

The distinction between pleural mesothelioma and peripheral pulmonary adenocarcinoma involving the pleura continues to be a diagnostic problem in surgical pathology. In recent years, the use of various immunohistochemical markers to facilitate this differential diagnosis has become common. In this study, the value of monoclonal antibodies 44-3A6, SM3, HBME-1, and thrombomodulin is compared in the differentiation of these conditions. Fifteen (68.2%) of 22, and 10 (52.6%) of 19 mesotheliomas stained positively with 44-3A6 and SM3, respectively, whereas all 23 (100%) adenocarcinomas reacted with both antibodies. Sixteen (80%) of 20 mesotheliomas and 14 (63.6%) of 22 lung adenocarcinomas reacted with HBME-1, whereas 16 (80%) of 20 mesotheliomas and only three (11.1%) of 27 adenocarcinomas were positive for thrombomodulin. Because thrombomodulin was expressed in most mesotheliomas but in only a few lung adenocarcinomas, this marker may have some diagnostic value when it is included in the standard immunohistochemical panel of markers used in the evaluation of mesotheliomas, especially when a positive marker for mesothelioma is needed. Antibodies 44-3A6, SM3, and HBME-1 have no practical value in discriminating epithelial pleural mesothelioma from lung adenocarcinoma.

Pleural mesothelioma: an approach to diagnostic problems

In the 1960s, a close relationship between heavy exposures to crocidolite asbestos and mesothelioma was established. The debate on the diagnosis of mesothelioma became complicated because of the possibility of litigation. Well differentiated mesothelioma cells are mucicarmine negative but alcian blue and periodic acid-Schiff (PAS) positive, which are removed by hyaluronidase and diastase digestion. By electron microscopy (EM), they show bush-like elongated, slender, and branching microvilli. By immunohistochemistry they express both keratin and vimentin but not carcinoembryonic antigenicity (CEA), B72.3, Ber-EP4, and Leu-M1. In poorly differentiated mesotheliomas, chromosomal and molecular biological alterations are common and complex but these alterations also overlap with that of poorly differentiated tumours of the lung and other organs. A poorly differentiated pleural tumour is most likely metastatic and needs good team work to locate the primary site. The diagnosis of a mesothelioma and asbestosis should be established separately. Future studies will be focused less on the phenotypic differences but more on the broad molecular and multi-phasic mechanisms of carcinogenesis, irrespective of the aetiological agents, in poorly differentiated tumours.

Malignant epithelial mesothelioma of the peritoneum: observations on a problem case

A 71-year-old asbestos-exposed male with symptoms suggestive of asbestosis for the previous 8 years presented with abdominal distension and ascites. Clinically, a diagnosis of mesothelioma carcinoma was made. Light microscopy of an omental biopsy failed to advance the diagnosis: The tumor was a solid, papillary, and glandular neoplasm lacking mucin and hyaluronidase-sensitive Alcian blue staining material. Immunohistochemistry gave positive results for Ber-EP4, LeuM1, and CEA, markers, favoring carcinoma. Electron microscopy revealed processes in channels and lumina, which were long, slender, and uncoated with a length: diameter ratio of 19.7. A few possessed small rootlets. A glycocalyx and glycocalyceal bodies were not seen. Other features included tonofibrils, a basal lamina, and desmosomes. The patient died 3 months following the onset of abdominal symptoms. Autopsy findings included solid and papillary tumor throughout the peritoneum, but no intrinsic tumor of the gastrointestinal tract or elsewhere. Arriving at a final diagnosis was complicated by immunohistochemistry, which favored carcinoma, and ultrastructure, which suggested mesothelioma. Taking into account all lines of evidence, it was concluded that the tumor was probably a mesothelioma but one with some features developed to an extent more typical of carcinoma.

Adenocarcinoma simulating mesothelioma

Pleural biopsy in a 45-year-old woman with a haemorrhagic pleural effusion showed malignant cells. Stains for mucin and carcinoembryonic antigen were positive and adenocarcinoma was diagnosed. Some ultrastructural features were more typical of mesothelioma.

Diagnostic tools for differentiating between pleural mesothelioma and lung adenocarcinoma in paraffin embedded tissue. Part I: Immunohistochemical findings

Specimens of 27 histologically definite mesotheliomas and 34 proven adenocarcinomas were examined with a panel of 14 antibodies: pan-epithelial antibody Lu-5, anti-keratin-18, anti-keratin-7, Ber-EP4, anti-Leu-M1, HEA-125, anti-carcino-embryonic antigen (CEA), anti-blood group-related antigens (anti-BGR A, B, H), B72.3, anti-placental alkaline phosphatase (PLAP), anti-vimentin and BMA-120 used to determine their value in the differentiation between pleural mesothelioma and lung adenocarcinoma. Lu-5, anti-cytokeratin-7 and -18, B 72.3 and PLAP reacted in a high percentage of cases with both mesothelioma and adenocarcinoma. Anti-CEA and anti-Leu-M1 did not react with any of the 27 mesotheliomas tested but showed a reaction in 75% (anti-CEA) and 66% (anti-Leu-M1) of the lung adenocarcinomas. Seventeen percent of the adenocarcinomas and 96% of the mesotheliomas showed a positive reaction with anti-vimentin. Ber-EP4 was demonstrated in all lung adenocarcinomas, but only in 2 mesotheliomas in a focal manner (7%). HEA-125 and anti-BGR A, B, H reacted with 83% (HEA-125) and 75% (anti-BGR A, B, H) of the lung adenocarcinomas. The statistical parameters, sensitivity and efficiency were estimated and a normogram for judging the diagnostic power of a single antibody for the differential diagnosis of mesothelioma versus adenocarcinoma was developed. According to this, Ber-EP4, HEA-125, anti-BGR A, B, H and anti-CEA were, in descending order, the most powerful discriminatory antibodies.

Diagnostic criteria for human diffuse malignant mesothelioma

Diffuse malignant mesothelioma is a rare tumor in the general population, yet is unique in that it is caused almost exclusively by exposure to asbestos with long-term latency (15 years and over). Pathologists are required to provide a reliable diagnosis of the tumor for clinicians who are responsible for the treatment of affected patients. Pathological diagnosis of diffuse malignant mesothelioma is not always easy; however, it has improved over the last few decades. Currently, comprehensive analysis, including gross appearance, histology, histochemistry, immunocytochemistry and electron microscopy is recommended as the best approach to an accurate diagnosis of diffuse malignant mesothelioma.

The role of closed pleural needle biopsy in the diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma of the pleura

Malignant mesothelioma of the pleura is a disease that requires a biopsy procedure for a definitive diagnosis. In the past, closed pleural needle biopsy (CPNB) has given poor yields due to the small amount of tissue obtained, and the patient has subsequently been subjected to a diagnostic thoracotomy. In recent years, the availability of more accurate histopathologic tests have enabled the pathologist to make a diagnosis more easily on samples obtained at CPNB. In this retrospective study of 20 consecutive cases of malignant mesothelioma of the pleura diagnosed between 1980 and 1990, we found that a blind CPNB was diagnostic in five of seven procedures and CT-guided CPNB was diagnostic in five of six procedures. An open pleural biopsy (OPB) was diagnostic in ten of ten procedures performed. There were no complications associated with any of the CPNB procedures. We conclude that CPNB is a safe and effective manner of diagnosing malignant mesothelioma of the pleura, and should be attempted prior to OPB.

Contact between abluminal microvilli and collagen fibrils in metastatic adenocarcinoma and mesothelioma

It can be difficult to differentiate between epithelial and mixed type mesothelioma and metastatic adenocarcinoma. To distinguish between the two, it has recently been suggested that the presence of abluminal microvilli making contact with collagen fibrils through discontinuities in the basal lamina was characteristic of mesothelioma but not of metastatic adenocarcinoma. This study presents three patients out of 39 who had adenocarcinoma metastatic to the pleural and abdominal cavities, in which direct contact was observed between abluminal microvilli and collagen fibrils. All 39 examples of mesothelioma which were also examined demonstrated this feature. This phenomenon should therefore not be used as a discriminator between mesothelioma and metastatic adenocarcinoma. An additional patient with metastatic adenocarcinoma in an axillary lymph node demonstrates that this phenomenon is not limited to the pleural or abdominal cavities.

Diagnostic value of some matrix components

Although most diagnostic markers lie within the cell, a few are found in the matrix. Well-known examples of these are amyloid filaments and fibrous long-spacing collagen (Luse body). Perhaps not so well-known are the diagnostic values of anchoring fibrils and microvillus-matrix associations. The latter two form the subject of this paper.

Pseudomesotheliomatous carcinoma of the lung. An immunohistochemical and ultrastructural study of three cases

The authors report immunohistochemical and electron microscopic studies on three new cases of pseudomesotheliomatous carcinoma of the lung. Although the distinct clinical and histopathologic features of this peripheral lung cancer were described many years ago, its recognition as a distinct variety of lung carcinoma has not gained wide acceptance. Little is known of its incidence and only few cases have been reported until now. In the current study the authors demonstrate the epithelial nature of this tumor by its positive immunohistochemical reactions for epithelial membrane antigen (EMA), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), Leu-M1, B 72.3, and surfactant apoprotein. The ultrastructural features and staining of nuclear inclusions with surfactant apoprotein indicate differentiation into type II cells as found in other forms of peripheral lung adenocarcinoma. Despite these morphologic similarities, pseudomesotheliomatous carcinoma is characterized by extensive invasion of the pleura and rapidly fatal course. Because of this biologic behavior it deserves recognition as a distinct variant of peripheral lung carcinoma.

Immunocytochemistry of malignant mesothelioma: OV632 as a marker of malignant mesothelioma

In pleural or ascitic effusions the cytomorphological distinction of adenocarcinoma cells, reactive mesothelial cells, and malignant mesothelioma cells often causes a diagnostic dilemma. The value of immunocytochemistry was investigated on cytological smears of 24 well-established cases of malignant mesothelioma, a selected series of 31 metastatic adenocarcinomas, and 20 smears of patients without known malignancy. In these smears we scored the immunoreactivity with a panel of four monoclonal antibodies. In addition to antibodies for epithelial membrane antigen (EMA) and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), the monoclonal antibody MOC31 and the ovarian carcinoma specific antibody OV632 were incorporated in the panel. With none of these four antibodies was immunostaining of reactive mesothelial cells found. CEA- and MOC31-positive tumour cells were frequent in metastatic adenocarcinomas, but occurred rarely in malignant mesotheliomas. EMA-positive tumour cells were found in all metastatic adenocarcinomas (100 per cent) and in most malignant mesotheliomas (83 per cent). In addition to the expected reactivity of OV632 with ovarian carcinomas, 22 of 24 malignant mesotheliomas contained immunopositive tumour cells, while only a small proportion of non-ovarian adenocarcinomas reacted with this antibody. This selective staining of malignant mesothelioma cells, but not reactive mesothelial cells, with OV632 now permits the positive identification of malignant mesothelioma cells in male patients.

The differential diagnosis of epithelial-type mesothelioma from adenocarcinoma and reactive mesothelial proliferation

Three monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have been applied to 14 adenocarcinomas, eight mesotheliomas, and nine reactive mesothelial proliferations. One of these, AUA1, is a novel antibody in this context. It was found in 13/14 of the adenocarcinomas but not in benign or malignant mesothelial tissue, making it a potential substitute for carcinoembyronic antigen (CEA) in the differential diagnosis of mesotheliomas from adenocarcinomas. In addition, the lesions were stained using an argyrophil technique to identify nucleolar organizer regions. The results of counting these showed a small but significant overlap in their numbers between malignant and benign mesothelial proliferations. Although there was a difference overall in the numbers of nucleolar organizer regions in adenocarcinomas and mesotheliomas, on the one hand, and benign hyperplasias, on the other, this overlap considerably reduces their value in assessing individual difficult cases.

Malignant epithelioid pleural mesothelioma versus peripheral pulmonary adenocarcinoma: a histochemical, ultrastructural, and immunohistologic study of 103 cases

The distinction between malignant epithelioid pleural mesothelioma (MEPM) and peripheral adenocarcinoma of the lung with pleural invasion (PAL) continues to represent a diagnostic challenge in selected cases. In order to provide comparative data on histologic, histochemical, and immunohistochemical features of these neoplasms, we analyzed 51 ultrastructurally categorized MEPMs and 52 PALs with the periodic acid-Schiff-diastase (PAS-D), mucicarmine, and colloidal iron stains, and a panel of immunohistologic reagents. Antibodies to cytokeratin, vimentin, epithelial membrane antigen (EMA), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), Leu M1, the B72.3 antigen, blood group isoantigens (BGI), placental alkaline phosphatase, amylase, S100 protein, and Clara cell antigen were used, as applied to paraffin sections with the avidin-biotin-peroxidase complex technique. Ultrastructural studies revealed long, branching microvilli in MEPM cells in all cases, with length-to-diameter ratios (LDR) of 10:1 or more. In contrast, PAL manifested short, nonbranching microvilli with LDR of 8:1 or less. Reactivity with PAS-D and mucicarmine stains was strictly confined to PAL, and hyaluronidase-sensitive colloidal iron-positivity was restricted to MEPM. However, only 63% and 41% of these respective neoplasms demonstrated such histochemical reactivity. Immunohistologic results correlated well with electron microscopic classification. All MEPMs and PALs were reactive for cytokeratin; in addition, the majority of tumors in each group expressed EMA, and a minority were reactive for vimentin. In adenocarcinomas of the lung, Leu M1 was observed in all cases, CEA was apparent in 96%, B72.3 labeled 84%, and BGI were present in 67%; all PALs expressed at least two of these determinants, but none was seen in any mesothelioma. The other markers included in this study also were observed in some PAL cases, but not in MEPM. These findings suggest that immunohistology parallels electron microscopy in efficacy in the diagnostic separation of MEPM and PAL. Using antibodies to Leu M1, CEA, and the B72.3 antigen, reactivity for at least two of these three markers appears to exclude a diagnosis of pleural mesothelioma. The other glycoproteinaceous, oncoplacentofetal, and cytoplasmic antigens we studied can be used to reinforce such a determination, since their distribution is confined to adenocarcinomas.

"Thick" cell membranes revealed by immunocytochemical staining: a clue to the diagnosis of mesothelioma

The distinction of malignant mesothelioma from metastatic adenocarcinoma in pleural effusions and biopsies is frequently a diagnostic problem. Immunocytochemical staining of 13 malignant mesotheliomas, eight primary adenocarcinomas of the lung, five metastatic adenocarcinomas of the lung, and 20 primary adenocarcinomas in extrapulmonary sites with a monoclonal antibody to epithelial membrane antigen (EMA) revealed "thick" cell membranes in all cases of mesothelioma. This distinctive pattern of staining was seen in the periphery of cell clusters and circumferentially around individual cells in cytologic preparations, cell blocks, and tissue sections. Intracellular and intercellular acini were also outlined by anti-EMA, and long intraluminal microvillous projections were demonstrated. Weak cytoplasmic staining was only rarely seen in mesothelioma cells. This membranous staining pattern was not observed in adenocarcinomas, which displayed strong and diffuse cytoplasmic staining. The immunocytochemical demonstration of thick and spiky membranes circumferentially disposed around individual cells corresponds to aberrant microvilli, a diagnostic clue in the recognition of malignant mesothelioma.

Immunohistochemical distinction of malignant mesothelioma from pulmonary adenocarcinoma with anti-surfactant apoprotein, anti-Lewisa, and anti-Tn antibodies

Nine cases of malignant mesothelioma of pure epithelial and biphasic types (five pleural, three peritoneal, and one pericardial mesotheliomas), seven cases of benign adenomatoid tumor of the uterus, and 21 cases of peripheral pulmonary adenocarcinoma of non-mucus-producing type were examined immunohistochemically for expression of keratin, vimentin, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), surfactant apoprotein, Lewis blood group antigens, and Tn antigen. The majority (78%) of the malignant mesotheliomas expressed keratin, but CEA and surfactant apoprotein were not detected in any mesotheliomas. On the other hand, pulmonary adenocarcinomas expressed not only keratin (100%), but also CEA (62%) and surfactant apoprotein (62%). The expression of Lewisa blood group antigen and Tn antigen was detected in 76% and 62% of the pulmonary adenocarcinomas, respectively, but only one mesothelioma was stained for Lewisa antigen. This study reveals that the majority of malignant mesotheliomas can be distinguished from pulmonary adenocarcinomas by immunohistochemcial staining for CEA, surfactant apoprotein, Lewisa antigen, and Tn antigen. Immunohistochemically, adenomatoid tumors behaved similarly to malignant mesotheliomas.

Synovial sarcoma of the heart arising from a so-called mesothelioma of the atrio-ventricular node

A primary tumour of the right atrium with morphological, ultrastructural and immunohistochemical features of a synovial sarcoma is described. This appeared to have arisen from a benign so-called mesothelioma of the atrio-ventricular node and had metastasized to the lungs. The histogenesis and relationship of these two tumours are discussed.

Lymphohistiocytoid mesothelioma: a rare lymphomatoid variant of predominantly sarcomatoid mesothelioma

Of 394 "definite" mesotheliomas entered in the Australian Mesothelioma Surveillance Program, three bore a striking resemblance to malignant lymphoma by conventional light microscopy, and each was misinterpreted at some stage as lymphoma. The lymphoma-like morphology was a combined result of intense lymphoplasmacytic infiltration and the histiocytoid appearances of the underlying neoplastic cell population. Immunocytochemical analysis demonstrated cytokeratins coexpressed with vimentin within the tumor cells, whereas immunoreactivity for leukocyte common antigen was confined to the smaller lymphoid cells. Electron microscopy of two cases revealed a polymorphous population of fibrohistiocytic cells resembling those typical of malignant fibrous histiocytoma, admixed with lymphocytes and plasma cells, but sporadic cells expressed mesothelial properties in the form of sinuous villiform processes, intracytoplasmic neolumina lined by microvilli, and intermediate filaments that were aggregated into tonofilament bundles in some cells. The ultrastructural appearances, the localization of the tumors to the pleura, with effusion, and absence of anterior mediastinal mass lesions facilitated exclusion of lymphocyte-rich thymoma. In addition, a history of prior occupational exposure to asbestos was elicited in each instance. There was no apparent response to radiotherapy or chemotherapy, and the patients died at 4, 5, and 8 months after presentation. Our observations suggest that immunocytochemical or ultrastructural evaluation is mandatory for accurate diagnosis of all pleura-based lymphomatoid lesions with a mixed large and small cell pattern.