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

Guidelines for Pathologic Diagnosis of Mesothelioma: 2023 Update of the Consensus Statement From the International Mesothelioma Interest Group

CONTEXT.—

Mesothelioma is an uncommon tumor that can be difficult to diagnose.

OBJECTIVE.—

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

DATA SOURCES.—

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

CONCLUSIONS.—

There was consensus opinion regarding guidelines for (1) histomorphologic diagnosis of mesothelial tumors, including distinction of epithelioid, biphasic, and sarcomatoid mesothelioma; recognition of morphologic variants and patterns; and recognition of common morphologic pitfalls; (2) molecular pathogenesis of mesothelioma; (3) application of immunohistochemical markers to establish mesothelial lineage and distinguish mesothelioma from common morphologic differentials; (4) application of ancillary studies to distinguish benign from malignant mesothelial proliferations, including BAP1 and MTAP immunostains; novel immunomarkers such as Merlin and p53; fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for homozygous deletion of CDKN2A; and novel molecular assays; (5) practical recommendations for routine reporting of mesothelioma, including grading epithelioid mesothelioma and other prognostic parameters; (6) diagnosis of mesothelioma in situ; (7) cytologic diagnosis of mesothelioma, including use of immunostains and molecular assays; and (8) features of nonmalignant peritoneal mesothelial lesions.

Utility of a Highly Specific and Sensitive Podoplanin/D2-40, Calretinin, Thyroid Transcription Factor-1, and Carcinoembryonic Antigen/CD66e Immunohistochemical Panel in Differentiating Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma from Metastatic Adenocarcinoma: An Egyptian Experience

Background and Objective

Considering plentiful immunohistochemical (IHC) antibodies, a selection of highly sensitive and specific targeted panels is necessary to differentiate malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) from metastatic adenocarcinoma. We aimed to examine the sensitivity and specificity of four markers (podoplanin [PDPN]/D2-40, calretinin, thyroid transcription factor-1 [TTF-1], and carcinoembryonic antigen [CEA]/CD66e) as an initial IHC panel of Egyptian patients with malignant pleural biopsies.

Materials and Methods

Forty Egyptian malignant pleural biopsies with histomorphological features of mesothelioma versus adenocarcinoma were immunohistochemically stained by PDPN/D2-40, calretinin, TTF-1, and CEA/CD66e.

Results

PDPN/D2-40 and calretinin were positive in 27/27, 100% of mesothelioma cases with 100% sensitivity, 96.4% specificity for PDPN/D2-40, and 100% sensitivity and specificity for calretinin. Membranous PDPN/D2-40 expression was strong in 14 cases (53.85%), moderate in eight cases (30.77%), and weak in four cases (15.38%), while pure cytoplasmic staining was reported in one case. Calretinin was predominantly nuclear in all mesothelioma cases. TTF1 and CEA/CD66e were negative in all mesothelioma cases. In adenocarcinomas, PDPN/D2-40 was only expressed as weak cytoplasmic staining in 1/13 cases, while calretinin was negative in all 13 cases. Nuclear TTF1 and cytoplasmic CEA/CD66e immunostaining positivity were reported in all adenocarcinoma cases (13/13) with 100% sensitivity and specificity for both markers.

Conclusion

The combination of PDPN/D2-40, calretinin together with CEA/CD66e, and TTF1 may be highly valuable in differentiating MPM from metastatic adenocarcinoma.

SPARC Is a Novel Positive Immunohistochemical Marker of Epithelioid Mesothelioma to Differentiate It From Lung Adenocarcinoma and/or Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Epithelioid mesothelioma with a solid histologic pattern (solid epithelioid mesothelioma) is difficult to distinguish from a poorly differentiated squamous cell lung carcinoma and/or solid lung adenocarcinoma. Thus, immunohistochemical markers are essential for diagnosis; however, the sensitivity and specificity of pre-existing mesothelial markers are suboptimal, particularly for differentiation from squamous cell carcinoma. Using a cancer-dependency map, we analyzed gene expression data of pleural mesothelioma and non-small cell lung cancer cell lines (squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma) and identified secreted protein acidic and cysteine-rich (SPARC) as a promising candidate for the differential diagnosis of epithelioid mesothelioma from lung squamous cell carcinoma and/or lung adenocarcinoma. SPARC expression in mesothelioma and lung cancer cell lines was validated using reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction, western blotting, and immunohistochemistry. Immunohistochemical staining was performed using anti-SPARC antibodies against solid epithelioid mesothelioma, solid lung adenocarcinoma, and poorly differentiated lung squamous cell carcinoma. SPARC positivity was seen in 42/45 (93.3%) of solid epithelioid mesothelioma, 2/40 (5%) solid lung adenocarcinoma, and 2/45 (4.5%) of lung squamous cell carcinomas. The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy for differentiating solid epithelioid mesothelioma from lung cancer (solid lung adenocarcinoma and poorly differentiated lung squamous cell carcinoma) were 93.3, 95.2, and 94.6%, respectively. In conclusion, SPARC is a novel mesothelial marker that can be used to differentiate epithelioid mesothelioma from squamous cell carcinoma and lung adenocarcinoma.

EWSR1::YY1 fusion positive peritoneal epithelioid mesothelioma harbors mesothelioma epigenetic signature: Report of 3 cases in support of an emerging entity

Mesothelioma is a rare, aggressive malignant neoplasm of mesothelial origin. A small subset of peritoneal mesothelioma is driven by recurrent gene fusions, mostly EWSR1/FUS::ATF1 fusions, with predilection for young adults. To date, only two cases of mesothelioma harboring EWSR1::YY1 fusions have been described. We present three additional cases of EWSR1::YY1-fused peritoneal mesotheliomas, two localized and one diffuse, all occurring in the peritoneum of middle-aged adults (2 females and 1 male), and discovered incidentally by imaging or during surgery performed for unrelated reasons. None presented with symptoms or had a known history of asbestos exposure. All three cases were cellular epithelioid neoplasms with heterogeneous architectural patterns comprising mostly solid nests and sheets with variably papillary and trabecular areas against collagenous stroma. Cytologically, the cells were monomorphic, polygonal, epithelioid cells with dense eosinophilic cytoplasm and centrally located nuclei. Overt mitotic activity or tumor necrosis was absent. All cases showed strong diffuse immunoreactivity for pancytokeratin, CK7, and nuclear WT1, patchy to negative calretinin, retained BAP1 expression, and were negative for Ber-EP4 and MOC31. RNA-sequencing confirmed in-frame gene fusion transcripts involving EWSR1 exon 7/8 and YY1 exon 2/3. By unsupervised clustering analysis, the methylation profiles of EWSR1::YY1-fused mesotheliomas clustered similarly with EWSR1/FUS::ATF1-fused mesotheliomas and conventional mesotheliomas, suggesting a mesothelioma epigenetic signature. All three patients underwent surgical resection or cytoreductive surgery of the masses. On follow-up imaging, no recurrence or progression of disease was identified. Our findings suggest that EWSR1::YY1-fusion defines a small subset of peritoneal epithelioid mesothelioma in middle-aged adults without history of asbestos exposure.

Case report: Primary pleural squamous cell carcinoma in a 68-year-old male

Introduction

Primary pleural squamous cell carcinoma (PPSCC) is a sporadic disease that is rarely reported in the literature. Due to its low incidence, the pathogenesis of PPSCC is unknown.

Case summary

We report a case of a 68-year-old male with PPSCC and sizable pulmonary bullae. Two months after complete resection of both lesions, a total dose of 50 Gy radiotherapy was administered over the operative field. After more than a year of follow-up, the patient is in steady condition without any sign of recurrence.

Conclusion

Since PPSCC is rarely reported, our case proposed that complete surgical resection combined with radiotherapy may be a promising therapeutic approach.

Peritoneal Pathology Review: Mullerian, Mucinous and Mesothelial Lesions

This review provides an overview of the pathology of selected benign and malignant lesions of the female peritoneum and their often-encountered differential diagnoses. It includes endometriosis and its related lesions, endosalpingiosis, pseudomyxoma peritonei (PMP) and related ovarian/appendiceal pathology, and malignant and benign mesothelial tumors. The current terminology associated with PMP is also discussed.

Update of pathological diagnosis of pleural mesothelioma using genomic-based morphological techniques, for both histological and cytological investigations

As more than 80% of pleural mesothelioma (PM) cases start with pleural effusions, diagnosis with effusion smear cytology or pleural biopsy is important. For diagnosing PM, a three-step approach is used: (1) detecting atypical cells; (2) verifying their mesothelial origin using immunohistochemistry (IHC); and (3) discriminating PM from benign mesothelial proliferations (BMP). The third step is critical for diagnosing early lesions. In small biopsy or cytologic specimens in which tumor cell fat invasion cannot be assessed, genomic-based assays, including IHC-detected BAP1 loss and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH)-detected homozygous deletion (HD) of CDKN2A/p16, are effective for differentiation. Both BAP1 IHC and CDKN2A FISH can equally be applied to histologic and cytologic specimens, with 100% specificity in discriminating PM from BMP. We found that methylthioadenosine phosphorylase (MTAP) loss as detected by IHC could serve as a feasible alternative in tissue and cytologic preparations for CDKN2A FISH. However, a combination including FISH was still most effective: the addition of NF2 FISH to CDKN2A FISH and BAP1 IHC yielded a greater sensitivity of close to 100% in diagnosing PM tissues. Although IHC is more feasible than FISH, owing to remaining challenges in data interpretation, caution and familiarity are warranted when diagnosing PM.

Immunocytochemistry for diagnostic cytopathology-A practical guide

Cytological specimens, which are obtained by minimally invasive methods, are an excellent source of diagnostic material. Sometimes they are the only material available for diagnosis as well as for prognostic/predictive markers. When cytomorphology is not straightforward, ancillary tests may be required for a definitive diagnosis to guide clinical management. Immunocytochemistry (ICC) is the most common and practical ancillary tool used to reach a diagnosis when cytomorphology is equivocal, to differentiate entities with overlapping morphological features, and to determine the cell lineage and the site of origin of a metastatic neoplasm. Numerous immunomarkers are available, and some are expressed in multiple neoplasms. To rule out entities within a differential diagnosis, the use of more than one marker, sometimes panels, is necessary. ICC panels for diagnostic purposes should be customised based on the clinical context and cytomorphology, and the markers should be used judiciously to preserve material for additional tests for targeted therapies in the appropriate setting. This review offers a practical guide for the use of ICC for diagnostic cytopathology, covering the most commonly encountered non-hematolymphoid diagnostic scenarios in various body sites.

Epidemiology, diagnosis and treatment of the malignant pleural mesothelioma, a narrative review of literature

The malignant pleural mesothelioma is a very aggressive tumor which is arising from mesothelial cells and is associated with asbestos exposure. It is a heterogeneous cancer that shows a complex pattern of molecular changes, including genetic, chromosomic, and epigenetic abnormalities. The malignant pleural mesothelioma is characterized by a silent and slow clinical progression with an average period of 20–40 years from the asbestos exposure phase to the start of the symptoms. Unfortunately, to date, the therapeutic options are very limited, especially if the tumor is detected late. This narrative review provides an extended overview of the present evidence in the literature regarding the epidemiology, diagnostic pathways and treatment approaches of the malignant pleural mesothelioma. The treatment of mesothelioma has evolved slowly over the last 20 years not only from a surgical point of view but also radiotherapy, chemotherapy and immunotherapy play nowadays a key role. Several surgical strategies are available ranging from extrapleural pneumonectomy to cytoreductive surgery but a multidisciplinary approach seems to be mandatory because a single approach has not proved to date to be resolutive. New non-surgical treatment options appear to be promising but the results have to be taken in account with caution because clear evidence with high-quality studies is still lacking

Aberrant Cytokeratin 20 Reactivity in Epithelioid Malignant Mesothelioma: A Case Report

Malignant mesothelioma is an uncommon neoplasm that should be distinguished from the more common pulmonary adenocarcinomas and other metastatic lesions. Although diagnosis is based on morphologic features, immunohistochemical stains such as Calretinin, WT-1, CK-5/6, D2-40, Ber-Ep4, and MOC-31 are routinely used. Other organ-specific immunohistochemical markers are used when metastases from unknown primary lesion is suspected clinically. Here, we report a case of pleural epithelioid malignant mesothelioma expressing CK20. A 68-year-old male presented to the Emergency Department with nonproductive cough and progressive shortness of breath. Chest x-ray showed a large left-sided pleural effusion. Metastasis from a gastrointestinal primary was clinically suspected. Cytopathologic examination of the pleural fluid demonstrated atypical cells singly and in clusters with round nuclei, prominent nucleoli, and dense cytoplasm. The cell block demonstrated single and clusters of atypical cells positive for calretinin, D2-40, WT-1, CK-5/6, and CK7. Ber-EP4, MOC-31, TTF-1, Napsin-A, and CDX-2 were negative. CK20 was diffusely positive. A diagnosis of atypical mesothelial proliferation with aberrant CK20 expression was made. A subsequent pleural biopsy demonstrated sheets of highly atypical cells that were diffusely and strongly positive for the mesothelial markers and CK20. Multiple studies have shown malignant mesotheliomas to lack CK20 reactivity. To our knowledge, this is the first case report of a diffuse and strong CK20-positive mesothelioma. Such aberrant expressions should be kept in mind when cases are histologically atypical or lack reactivity for multiple mesothelial markers, especially when a gastrointestinal primary malignancy is suspected.

Integrative approach to cytologic and molecular diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma

The global incidence of malignant mesothelioma (MM) causes considerable disease burden, suffering and health care costs. Beside preventive measures and ban the use of asbestos, early diagnosis would largely improve the chance of curative treatment. Current histologic criteria, however, requiring presence of invasion in the surrounding fatty tissue fail to identify MM in sufficiently early stage. Unilateral accumulation of pleural effusion is one of the earliest clinical manifestations of MM that occurs in approximately 90% of the patients. Therapeutic thoracocenthesis is necessary to remove the fluid and to relieve patients’ symptoms. This effusion is easily accessible and offers early and minimally invasive diagnosis by combining cytology with immunologic, molecular- and biomarker analyses. Typically, the fluid is rich in malignant cells and cell groups, but incipient stages of the disease may be difficult to recognize as the malignant cells can be masked by presence of inflammatory or reactive mesothelial cells. Recurrent, hemorrhagic and cell rich effusion should always be suspicious for MM and adequately prepared and analyzed to provide necessary information for subsequent therapy. Importantly, early detection of MM by integrating cytology and molecular approaches has high sensitivity and positive predictive value and has a major impact on patient survival. Thus, a conclusive positive MM cytology should lead to treatment without delay. This review summarizes molecular and diagnostic criteria of MM diagnosis.

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.

Application of immunohistochemistry in diagnosis and management of malignant mesothelioma

Immunohistochemistry plays an indispensable role in accurate diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma, particularly in morphologically challenging cases and in biopsy and cytology specimens, where tumor architecture is difficult or impossible to evaluate. Application of a targeted panel of mesothelial- and epithelial-specific markers permits correct identification of tumor lineage in the vast majority of cases. An immunopanel including two mesothelial markers (calretinin, CK5/6, WT-1, or D2-40) and two epithelial markers (MOC-31 and claudin-4) offers good sensitivity and specificity, with adjustments as appropriate for the differential diagnosis. Once mesothelial lineage is established, malignancy-specific studies can help verify a diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma. BAP1 loss, CDKN2A homozygous deletion, and MTAP loss are highly specific markers of malignancy in a mesothelial lesion, and they attain acceptable diagnostic sensitivity when applied as a diagnostic panel. Novel markers of malignancy, such as 5-hmC loss and increased EZH2 expression, are promising, but have not yet achieved widespread clinical adoption. Some diagnostic markers also have prognostic significance, and PD-L1 immunohistochemistry may predict tumor response to immunotherapy. Application and interpretation of these immnuomarkers should always be guided by clinical history, radiographic findings, and above all histomorphology.

Malignant peritoneal mesothelioma in a boar who lived in Calabria (Italy): Wild animal as sentinel system of human health

Mesothelioma is a tumor of the serosal membranes described both in human and veterinary medicine. While in humans the relationship between mesothelioma and exposure to asbestos and some other asbestiform minerals is well known, in animals it is still difficult to establish. In this paper a case of malignant peritoneal mesothelioma probably related to asbestos exposure in a wild boar is described. At post-mortem evaluation the peritoneum, diaphragm and serosal surface of liver and kidneys showed isolated to coalescent multiple nodular lesions. Samples from diaphragm, liver and lung were collected to perform microbiological and histological investigations. To assess the presence of asbestos and/or other asbestiform minerals, SEM-EDS investigations were performed on organs and soil samples collected from the area where the wild boar lived. Microbiological investigations were negative for Mycobacterium species. Gross and histological examination were compatible with a biphasic mesothelioma, with nodules composed of epithelioid and sarcomatoid elements with high pleomorphism. Immunohistochemistry revealed only multifocal scattered positivity for WT-1 and D2-40. Asbestos fibres were detected in all samples (organs and soil) by SEM-EDS, demonstrating a potential relationship between the neoplasia and the exposure to naturally occurring asbestos (NOA). In conclusion, the results of the present study are further confirmation that wild animals, such as the boar, are suitable sentinels to indicate the risk of environmental exposure to asbestos for human populations.

Pathologic Considerations and Standardization in Mesothelioma Clinical Trials

The accurate diagnosis of mesothelioma is critical for the appropriate clinical management of this cancer. Many issues complicate making the diagnosis of mesothelioma including the presence of reactive mesothelial cells in benign pleural effusions, the heterogeneity of mesothelioma histopathology, the relatively high incidence of other epithelial malignancies that metastasize to the pleura, and primary sarcomas that arise within the pleura. Given the rapidly evolving field of molecular profiling and the need for translational correlates in mesothelioma clinical trials, the National Cancer Institute (NCI)-International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer-Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation Clinical Trials Planning Meeting was convened in March 2017 to develop a consensus on standard pathology guidelines for future NCI-sponsored clinical trials in mesothelioma. This consensus statement covers recommendations for specimen handling, pathologic classification and diagnosis, biobanking, and tissue correlative studies.

Treatment of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline

Purpose To provide evidence-based recommendations to practicing physicians and others on the management of malignant pleural mesothelioma. Methods ASCO convened an Expert Panel of medical oncology, thoracic surgery, radiation oncology, pulmonary, pathology, imaging, and advocacy experts to conduct a literature search, which included systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and prospective and retrospective comparative observational studies published from 1990 through 2017. Outcomes of interest included survival, disease-free or recurrence-free survival, and quality of life. Expert Panel members used available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations. Results The literature search identified 222 relevant studies to inform the evidence base for this guideline. Recommendations Evidence-based recommendations were developed for diagnosis, staging, chemotherapy, surgical cytoreduction, radiation therapy, and multimodality therapy in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/thoracic-cancer-guidelines and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki .

Utility of Survivin, BAP1, and Ki-67 immunohistochemistry in distinguishing epithelioid mesothelioma from reactive mesothelial hyperplasia

Histological distinction between epithelioid mesothelioma (EM) and reactive mesothelial hyperplasia (RMH) can be challenging. The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic utility of Survivin, Ki-67, and loss of BRCA1-associated protein 1 (BAP1) expressions in distinguishing EM from RMH using immunohistochemistry. Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded specimens from 78 cases of EM and 80 cases of RMH were immunohistochemically examined for Survivin, BAP1, and Ki-67. In addition, receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were performed to establish the cut-off values for Survivin and Ki-67 labelling indices. Survivin (cut-off value: 5%) had 67.7% sensitivity and 100% specificity, while Ki-67 (cut-off value: 10%) had 85.1% sensitivity and 87.5% specificity, and BAP1 had 66.2% sensitivity and 100% specificity for the differentiation of EM from RMH. Among the combinations of two markers, the combination of Survivin and BAP1 (Survivin-positive and/or BAP1-loss finding) had the highest diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity: 89.8%; specificity: 100%; accuracy: 95.3%). We recommend using the combination of Survivin and BAP1 to distinguish EM from RMH.

MUC4 immunohistochemistry is useful in distinguishing epithelioid mesothelioma from adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma of the lung

The differential diagnosis of epithelioid mesothelioma from lung adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma requires the positive and negative immunohistochemical markers of mesothelioma. The IMIG guideline has suggested the use of Calretinin, D2–40, WT1, and CK5/6 as mesothelial markers, TTF-1, Napsin-A, Claudin 4, CEA as lung adenocarcinoma markers p40, p63, CK5/6, MOC-31 as squamous cell markers. However, use of other immunohistochemical markers is still necessary. We evaluated 65 epithelioid mesotheliomas, 60 adenocarcinomas, and 57 squamous cell carcinomas of the lung for MUC4 expression by immunohistochemistry and compared with the previously known immunohistochemical markers. MUC4 expression was not found in any of 65 cases of epithelioid mesothelioma. In contrast, MUC4 expression was observed in 50/60(83.3%) cases of lung adenocarcinoma and 50/56(89.3%) cases of lung squamous cell carcinoma. The negative MUC4 expression showed 100% sensitivity, 86.2% specificity and accuracy rate of 91.2% to differentiate epithelioid mesothelioma from lung carcinoma. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of MUC4 are comparable to that of previously known markers of lung adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma, namely CEA, Claudin 4 and better than that of MOC-31. In conclusion, MUC4 immunohistochemistry is useful for differentiation of epithelioid mesothelioma from lung carcinoma, either adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma.

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.

Diagnostic accuracy of BRCA1-associated protein 1 in malignant mesothelioma: a meta-analysis

Background

Conventional measurements are not always helpful in the diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma (MM). Increasing studies indicate that loss of BRCA1–associated protein 1 (BAP1) detected by immunohistochemistry (IHC) is a useful diagnostic marker for MM. In this meta-analysis, we investigated the diagnostic accuracy of BAP1 in MM.

Results

In total, 12 eligible studies with a total of 1824 patients were selected. Results indicated that loss of BAP1 sustained a pooled sensitivity of 0.56 (95% CI, 0.50–0.62), specificity of 1.00 (95% CI, 0.95–1.00), PLR of 548.82 (95% CI, 11.31–2.7 × 104), NLR of 0.44 (95% CI, 0.39–0.50), DOR of 1247.78 (95% CI, 25.08 −6.2 × 104) in discriminating MM from non-MM. The AUC of 0.72, reflecting the SROC, indicated moderate diagnostic accuracy. Subgroup analysis showed that BAP1 detection in histological specimens owned the higher diagnostic performance than cytological ones. In addition, BAP1 showed superior diagnostic accuracy in epithelioid MM than biphasic or sarcomatoid MM.

Materials and Methods

PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library and reference lists of related articles were searched, and studies that evaluated the utility of BAP1 in MM were included. Data from eligible studies were pooled to estimate sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). Summary receiver operating curves (SROC) was applied to estimate overall diagnostic accuracy.

Conclusions

Current meta-analysis indicates that detection of BAP1 by IHC is a useful diagnostic marker for MM. Loss of BAP1 almost provides confirming diagnosis for MM, while positive staining for BAP1 is not enough to exclude non-MM.

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.

Clinical and pathological characteristic of metastatic malignant mesothelioma initially diagnosed by lymph node biopsy

BACKGROUND

It is a great challenge for pathologists to initially diagnose metastatic malignant mesothelioma (MM) by the lymph node biopsy without any history of primary MM. Because the onset of MM is hidden and the metastatic MM in lymph node is relatively uncommon. Besides, morphologic and immuohistochemistry features of MM are similar to other tumors.

METHODS

In order to improve the initial diagnostic accuracy of metastatic MM from LN biopsy and to reduce or avoid the possibility of missed diagnosis or misdiagnosis, we had collected the clinical and pathological data of the metastatic MM cases in our department, and summarized the characteristics of morphological, immunohistochemical and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) results.

RESULTS

Seven patients (4 males and 3 females) with 21-73 year-old had been included in our study. Six cases showed serous cavity effusion, serosal thickening and systemic multiple lymph node enlargement. The "moderate, nice" tumor cells were arranged in variable patterns. Mitosis was hardly to be found and necrosis was absent. Four immunohistochemical staining panels and FISH detection had been used for diagnosis and differential diagnosis of MM. All cases expressed broad-spectrum epithelial markers and at least 2 mesothelial-cell-origin markers. None were positive for specific-tissue-origin markers, and all cases were diagnosed of malignancy according to immunohistochemical markers and detection of pl6 gene deletion.

CONCLUSION

It is necessary for us to keep our awareness of metastatic MM in lymph node. Correct diagnosis of MM metastasis by lymph node biopsy were based on detailed understanding of the clinical manifestation and the image data, careful observation of morphologic characteristics, and properly using immunohistochemical markers or FISH detection if necessary for diagnosis and differential diagnosis.

miR-130A as a diagnostic marker to differentiate malignant mesothelioma from lung adenocarcinoma in pleural effusion cytology

BACKGROUND

Malignant pleural mesothelioma is a rare tumor with a dismal prognosis, usually presenting with recurrent effusions. However, the majority of malignant pleural effusions are due to lung adenocarcinoma (AdC). The distinction between these tumors has considerable therapeutic and medicolegal implications and can be very challenging both histologically and cytologically. Appropriate immunohistochemistry (IHC) is required to support the diagnosis. MicroRNA (miRNA) expression analysis could be a viable diagnostic tool for distinguishing between these tumors. The purpose of the current study was to assess the reliability of miRNAs as diagnostic markers to differentiate epithelioid malignant mesothelioma (MM) from lung AdC.

METHODS

Bioinformatic analysis of publicly searchable data sets regarding miRNA expression profiling was performed to select the most significant differentially expressed miRNAs. These were analyzed by quantitative polymerase chain reaction on histologic (41 MM cases and 40 lung AdC cases) and cytological (26 MM cases and 27 lung AdC cases) specimens and the diagnostic performances were assessed.

RESULTS

miR-130a, miR-193a, miR-675, miR-141, miR-205, and miR-375 were found to be the best distinguishing markers. Of these, only miR-130a was significantly overexpressed in MM compared with lung AdC (P =.029 in histologic and P =.014 in cytological samples). miR-130a demonstrated a sensitivity of 77%, a specificity of 67%, a positive predictive value of 69%, a negative predictive value of 75%, and an accuracy of 72% in identifying MM.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnostic performances of miR-130a expression analysis and IHC appear to be similar. miR-130a quantification could be used reliably as second-level diagnostic tool to differentiate MM from lung AdC in pleural effusion cytology, mainly in those cases with ambiguous or negative IHC. Further validation is needed. Cancer Cytopathol 2017;125:635-43. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

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.

CD24 is highly useful in differentiating high-grade serous carcinoma from benign and malignant mesothelial cells

CD24 was previously shown to be overexpressed in high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC) effusions compared to malignant mesothelioma (MM) in gene expression array analysis. The present study validated this observation in a large series consisting of both effusions and surgical specimens. Effusions (n = 206; 100 HGSC, 16 ovarian carcinomas of other histological types, 54 breast carcinomas, 36 MM) and surgical specimens (n = 182; 117 ovarian carcinomas, 65 MM) were analyzed for CD24 expression using immunohistochemistry. CD24 was expressed in 105/116 (91%) ovarian carcinoma and 16/54 (30%) breast carcinoma effusions, while it was uniformly absent in MM (0/36; 0%; P < .001). Reactive mesothelial cells were CD24-negative in all carcinoma specimens. Comparative analysis of 117 solid primary (n = 43) and metastatic (n = 74) ovarian carcinomas and 65 solid MM specimens showed CD24 expression in 46% (54/117) of the former compared to 3% (2/65) of the latter (P < .001). Comparative analysis of ovarian carcinomas at different anatomic sites showed significantly higher CD24 expression in effusions compared to solid ovarian and metastatic lesions (P < .001), with similar results when analysis was limited to HGSC (P < .001). In conclusion, CD24 is a highly sensitive and specific marker of ovarian carcinoma in the differential diagnosis from MM and reactive mesothelium in effusions. CD24 is similarly a specific marker in surgical specimens, though with lower sensitivity. The overexpression of CD24 in ovarian carcinoma effusions compared to solid lesions may be due to the acquisition of cancer stem cell characteristics.

Pathology reporting of malignant pleural mesothelioma first diagnosis: A population-based approach

Accurate pathologic diagnosis and reporting in malignant pleural mesothelioma are essential for clinical care, and cancer registration. Practical guidelines for pathologists are provided in publications and textbooks but it is unclear how these recommendations are applied in routine practice. We investigated the characteristics of pathology reports, and the extent to which they meet guideline standards. We reviewed 819 pathology reports relating to a first diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma. Data sources were a regional section of the Italian network of the Mesothelioma Registry (2001-2014) and a pathology archive (1990-2000). We evaluated tumor characteristics, the diagnosis field including terminology and immunohistochemistry (IHC) workup, and report completeness (the proportion of items recorded). We investigated also two IHC panels identified by the most used markers in current practical guidelines, one best suited for epithelioid mesotheliomas (combinations of at least 2 positive and at least 2 negative mesothelioma markers) and the other best suited for sarcomatoid mesotheliomas (positive mesothelioma markers plus cytokeratins). Reports (753 histology, 66 cytology, IHC-confirmed 86%) were 74% complete and always narrative. Missing data were related to clinical history (76%), tumor laterality (61%), specimen size (38%), and histological subtype (23%). The proportion of cases with IHC was higher for epithelioid (90%) than sarcomatoid mesothelioma (87%). Compliance to IHC recommendations was higher for epithelioid (59%) than sarcomatoid mesothelioma (11%). The mean number of stains was significantly higher for sarcomatoid than epithelioid mesothelioma (p<0.000; Kruskal-Wallis test). Our findings show that although guidelines are designed to improve actual reporting practices, there is ample room for improvement in their application to standardize the diagnosis of mesothelioma. Synoptic pathology reporting needs to be implemented to better utilize pathology information.

Diagnostic efficacy of electron microscopy and pleural effusion cytology for the distinction of pleural mesothelioma and lung adenocarcinoma

The diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is challenging and requires immunohistochemistry or electron microscopy assays to specifically differentiate MPM from lung adenocarcinoma. An ultrastructural study of fresh tissue is considered to be the "gold standard." In most cases, the first diagnostic approach is performed on pleural effusion, and in some patients, this is the only available sample for diagnosis. The aim of the present study is to evaluate if an examination of pleural effusion samples based on electron microscopy (EMpe) is a useful tool for the differential diagnosis of MPM and lung adenocarcinoma. An EMpe study was performed in 25 pleural effusion samples. Histological and immunohistochemical markers confirmed the diagnosis of either mesothelioma (5) or adenocarcinoma (20). Of the five cases that were diagnosed with mesothelioma, two samples (40%) showed cells with "bushy" microvilli, which are characteristic of mesothelioma, by EMpe, and three were acellular (60%). Of the 20 cases of adenocarcinoma, EMpe showed cells with short microvilli in 9 (45%), and 11 were acellular (55%). EMpe identifies unequivocal morphological changes that are useful for the differential diagnosis of MPM or adenocarcinoma when the pleural effusion sample contains evaluable tumor cells.

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.

Use of Anti-Noxa Antibody for Differential Diagnosis between Epithelioid Mesothelioma and Reactive Mesothelial Hyperplasia

OBJECTIVES

The histological differential diagnosis between epithelioid mesothelioma (EM) and reactive mesothelial hyperplasia (RMH) is not always straightforward. The aim of the present study was to search for new immunohistochemical markers to distinguish EM from RMH.

METHODS

We evaluated and compared the expression of apoptosis-related genes in EM and RMH by real-time RT-PCR array analysis followed by clustering of significant gene expression. Immunohistochemical staining and statistical analysis of Noxa expression in 81 cases of EM and 55 cases of RMH were performed and compared with the utility of other previously reported antibodies such as Desmin, EMA, GLUT-1, IMP-3 and CD146.

RESULTS

Noxa mRNA expression levels were found to be increased in EM when compared to RMH by RT-PCR array analysis. In the immunohistochemical analysis, Noxa showed sensitivity of 69.0%, specificity of 93.6% and positive predictive value of 93.0% as a positive marker of EM in distinguishing it from RMH, and these values were almost similar to IMP-3.

CONCLUSION

Noxa is a marker with relatively high specificity, and can be used to distinguish EM from RMH. It would be a valuable addition to the current antibody panel used for the differential diagnosis of EM and RMH.

Pathology analysis for mesothelioma study in the United Kingdom: Current practice and historical development

Following up on the largest case-control study of malignant mesothelioma yet performed, investigators at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine assessed 1732 male and 670 female cases as of May 2013. Epidemiological findings of a subset of these were published previously, excluding patients who died or who refused to be interviewed. Pathology reports were collected for subjects, including those both eligible and ineligible for epidemiology study based on vital status. The current investigation examined 860 cases having pathology reports available. Sixty-one cases were diagnosed using cytology only, often with equivocal diagnoses, while 799 reported at least a biopsy of the tumor. Of these, 748 had pathology sufficiently detailed for evaluation. These reports were examined for basis of diagnosis, differences between study cases and ineligible cases, pathology characteristics, and immunohistochemical and other tests used. The most prominent subtype was epithelioid (64% of study cases but only 49% of ineligible cases). Biphasic subtype was present in 10% of study cases and 16% of those ineligible. Sarcomatoid subtype was present in 7% of study cases and 19% of ineligible cases, most of whom died. Twelve percent of study cases displayed no specified subtype, versus 7% of ineligible cases. Of recorded immunohistochemical stains specific for mesothelial cell origin, calretinin (95%) and CK 5/6 or CK5 alone (84%) were by far the most common. Calretinin and CK 5/6 or CK 5 alone were also most sensitive and positive in 92% of cases presenting with surgical pathology report. Ninety percent of cases had at least one immunohistochemical marker for possible lung carcinoma applied, with BER-Ep4 and TTF-1 the most frequent at 68% and CEA at 58%. TTF-1 and CEA were positive in 1% or less of cases. Patterns of use and positive and negative results for each of these as well as other immunohistochemical stains are presented and discussed, along with a brief historical description of their development and use. Possible effects of the pathologic analysis on the results of previously published and future epidemiological studies are discussed.

Malignant Mesothelioma Diagnosis

CONTEXT

Malignant mesothelioma is a relatively rare pleural tumor that may mimic benign mesothelial lesions and various other tumors including carcinomas and sarcomas. This makes the diagnosis challenging for the pathologist.

OBJECTIVE

To provide a brief but useful update on the immunohistochemical, cytogenetic, and molecular markers that are currently available for the diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma.

DATA SOURCES

Reference materials including peer-reviewed publications, text books, and consensus opinion reports among pathologists.

CONCLUSIONS

It is important to correlate histologic findings on adequate biopsy samples with clinical and radiologic features. Useful diagnostic mesothelial markers include calretinin, WT-1, cytokeratin 5/6, and D2-40 (podoplanin). It is recommended that at least 2 mesothelial and 2 carcinoma markers with greater than 80% sensitivity and specificity be used for the diagnosis of mesothelioma when all clinical, radiologic, and histologic features are concordant. p16 deletion is reported in up to 70% of primary epithelioid and 90% to 100% of sarcomatoid pleural mesotheliomas. Presence of this homozygous gene deletion is so far the best indicator of mesothelioma. To date, this deletion has not been reported in any benign mesothelial lesion. The impact of various histologic patterns on the clinical and prognostic aspects of mesothelioma is addressed. The pleomorphic pattern, when present in more than 10% of tumor, translates into a highly aggressive behavior and is associated with poor survival. Recent studies have shown that the high-grade subgroup of deciduoid mesothelioma with pleomorphic histologic pattern also has a more aggressive clinical course. Nuclear grade (combination of nuclear atypia and mitotic count) may also prove to be an independent prognostic factor.

Diagnostic tools and staging of malignant pleural mesothelioma

The diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma remains challenging and should be based on both histologic evidence of invasion and immunohistochemical findings supportive of mesothelioma. Cytology is a controversial method of diagnosis, but may be a useful tool, particularly in the identification of other metastatic malignancies. Malignant pleural mesothelioma must be differentiated from benign, reactive mesothelial proliferations and other metastatic malignancies. Histologic analysis in conjunction with immunohistochemistry, electron microscopy, and limited molecular diagnostics are most useful in establishing a diagnosis. The staging of malignant pleural mesothelioma is most commonly performed using a TNM (tumor, node, metastasis) system proposed by the International Mesothelioma Interest Group.

Peritoneal Malignant Mesothelioma with Epithelioid Type, Demonstrating High Serum and Ascitic KL-6 Levels: Immunohistochemical Analyses

We report a case of KL-6 producing peritoneal malignant mesothelioma. A 56-year-old woman was referred to our hospital on November 2005 with severe abdominal distention. Peritoneal malignant mesothelioma with epithelioid type was diagnosed by clinical symptoms, laboratory investigations, imaging studies, and immunohistochemical examination of known tumor markers. In addition, high serum and ascitic KL-6 levels were observed and the immunostaining of the tumor for KL-6 was evident. We thus consider KL-6 to be a potential novel marker for peritoneal malignant mesothelioma with epithelioid type.

BAP1 (BRCA1-associated protein 1) is a highly specific marker for differentiating mesothelioma from reactive mesothelial proliferations

The distinction between malignant mesothelioma and reactive mesothelial proliferation can be challenging both on histology and cytology. Recently, variants of the BRCA1-associated protein 1 (BAP1) gene resulting in nuclear protein loss were reported in hereditary and sporadic mesothelioma. Using immunohistochemistry, we evaluated the utility of BAP1 expression in the differential diagnosis between mesothelioma and other mesothelial proliferations on a large series of biopsies that included 212 mesotheliomas, 12 benign mesothelial tumors, and 42 reactive mesothelial proliferations. BAP1 stain was also performed in 70 cytological samples (45 mesotheliomas and 25 reactive mesothelial proliferations). BAP1 was expressed in all benign mesothelial tumors, whereas 139/212 (66%) mesotheliomas were BAP1 negative, especially in epithelioid/biphasic compared with sarcomatoid/desmoplastic subtypes (69% vs 15%). BAP1 loss was homogeneous in neoplastic cells except for two epithelioid mesotheliomas showing tumor heterogeneity. By fluorescence in situ hybridization, BAP1 protein loss was paralleled by homozygous deletion of the BAP1 locus in the vast majority of BAP1-negative tumors (31/41, 76%), whereas 9/10 BAP1-positive mesotheliomas were normal. In biopsies interpreted as reactive mesothelial proliferation BAP1 loss was 100% predictive of malignancy, as all 6 cases subsequently developed BAP1-negative mesothelioma, whereas only 3/36 (8%) BAP1-positive cases progressed to mesothelioma. On cytology/cell blocks, benign mesothelial cells were invariably positive for BAP1, whereas 64% of mesotheliomas showed loss of protein; all 6 cases showing BAP1 negativity were associated with histological diagnosis of BAP1-negative mesothelioma. BAP1 stain also showed utility in the differential of mesothelioma from most common pleural and peritoneal mimickers, such as lung and ovary carcinomas, with specificity and sensitivity of 99/70% and 100/70%, respectively. Our results show that BAP1 protein is frequently lost in mesothelioma, especially of epithelioid/biphasic subtype and is commonly associated with homozygous BAP1 deletion. BAP1 immunostain represents an excellent biomarker with an unprecedented specificity (100%) in the distinction between benign and malignant mesothelial proliferations. Finding BAP1 loss in mesothelial cells should prompt to immediately reevaluate the patient; moreover, it might be useful in mapping tumor extent and planning surgical resection.

p16/CDKN2A FISH in Differentiation of Diffuse Malignant Peritoneal Mesothelioma From Mesothelial Hyperplasia and Epithelial Ovarian Cancer

OBJECTIVES

It can be difficult to differentiate diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (DMPM) from reactive mesothelial hyperplasia (RMH) or peritoneal dissemination of gynecologic malignancies, such as epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC), which cause a large amount of ascites. Detection of the homozygous deletion of p16/CDKN2A (p16) by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) is an effective adjunct in the diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma. The aim of this study was to investigate the ability of the p16 FISH assay to differentiate DMPM from RMH and EOC.

METHODS

p16 FISH was performed in 28 DMPMs (successful in 19), 30 RMHs, and 40 EOC cases. The cutoff values of p16 FISH were more than 10% for homozygous deletion and more than 40% for heterozygous deletion.

RESULTS

According to the above criteria, nine (47.4%) of 19 successful DMPM cases were homozygous deletion positive, and three (15.8%) of 19 were heterozygous deletion positive, whereas all RMH cases were negative for the p16 deletion. In all four major histologic subtypes of EOC, neither p16 homozygous nor heterozygous deletions were detected. To differentiate DMPM from RMH or EOC, the sensitivity of the p16 homozygous deletion was 32% (9/28), and the specificity was 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that p16 FISH analysis is useful in differentiating DMPM from RMH and EOC when homozygous deletion is detected.

Value of podoplanin as an immunohistochemical marker in tumor diagnosis: a review and update

Podoplanin is a type I integral membrane glycoprotein that, because it is expressed in lymphatic endothelium, but not in vascular blood vessel endothelial cells, is commonly used in the identification of lymphatic endothelial differentiation in vascular endothelial neoplasms and lymphatic invasion by tumor. Because podoplanin is also expressed in mesothelial cells and fetal gonocytes, it has proved to be a useful marker for assisting in the differential diagnosis of mesotheliomas and germ cell tumors, particularly seminomas/dysgerminomas. Podoplanin expression has also been reported in a wide variety of other neoplasms, including hemangioblastomas, meningiomas, cartilaginous tumors, and follicular dendritic cell neoplasms. This article reviews the information that is currently available on the application of podoplanin immunostaining in diagnostic pathology.

Hippo/YAP pathway for targeted therapy

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is molecularly characterized by loss of function or mutations in the neurofibromin 2 (NF2) and the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2 genes. NF2 activates a cascade of kinases, called Hippo pathway, which downregulates Yes associated protein (YAP) function as transcription co-activator for TEA domain transcription factors (TEAD). In the absence of functional NF2, the expression of genes essential for cell cycling such as survivin is increased. New therapeutic strategies aimed at interfering with YAP activity include inhibition of hedgehog pathway, which downregulates the YAP protein, verteporfin, which inhibits the assembly of a functional YAP-TEAD transcription factor, and interference with thrombin and lysophosphatidic acid (LPA) receptors downstream signalling, since upon agonist binding they activate YAP.

Value of calretinin immunostaining in diagnostic pathology: a review and update

Calretinin is a member of the EF-hand family of calcium-binding proteins. Because its expression is highly restricted to mesotheliomas, calretinin is, at present, the most commonly used positive mesothelioma marker that is most often recommended to be included in the various immunohistochemical panels used to assist in the differential diagnosis of these tumors. Calretinin expression has also been reported to be commonly expressed in a wide variety of other neoplasms, including sex cord-stromal tumors, adrenal cortical neoplasms, olfactory neuroblastomas, Schwann cell tumors, cardiac myxomas, and ameloblastomas. This article reviews the information that is currently available on calretinin expression in tumors and on its application as an immunohistochemical marker in diagnostic pathology.

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.

The Application of Immunohistochemical Biomarkers in Urologic Surgical Pathology

Context

Tumors of the genitourinary tract can be diagnostically challenging, particularly in core biopsies and cystoscopic biopsies with limited material. Immunohistochemistry is a valuable tool to use when morphology alone is insufficient for diagnosis.

Objectives

To review tumors and benign lesions of the kidney, urinary bladder, prostate gland, testis, and paratesticular structures with an emphasis on difficult differential diagnoses, as well as staining patterns in normal tissue. Recommended immunohistochemical stain panels are discussed that can assist in the diagnostic workup.

Data Sources

Review of current literature.

Conclusions

Immunohistochemistry is a valuable tool, assisting in the diagnosis of problematic tumors and benign lesions of the genitourinary tract.

[Morphological diagnostics of malignant pleural mesothelioma]

The World Health Organization (WHO) classification differentiates between pleural tumors of mesothelial and mesenchymal origin as well as lymphoproliferative disorders, with malignant mesotheliomas forming the most common pleural primary tumor. Histologically, epithelioid (40-60 %), sarcomatoid (20-40 %), and biphasic mesotheliomas (20-40 %) are distinguished. The certain morphological diagnosis of a malignant pleural mesothelioma requires the establishment of mesothelial differentiation by means of an appropriate panel of antibodies to exclude pleural dissemination of a pulmonary or extrapulmonary epithelial malignancy and also requires the establishment of at least focal invasive growth to distinguish from reactive mesothelial proliferation. The exclusion of a malignant pleural mesothelioma may induce further differential diagnostic considerations, e. g. concerning the assignment to a certain primary tumor after the establishment of carcinomatous pleuritis.

Diagnostic utility of immunohistochemistry in distinguishing between epithelioid pleural mesotheliomas and breast carcinomas: a comparative study

Epithelioid mesotheliomas and breast carcinomas can present a variety of morphologic patterns. Because of this, breast carcinomas that metastasize to the pleura and lung may be confused with mesotheliomas. The aim of the present study is to compare the immunohistochemical markers currently available for the diagnosis of these 2 malignancies and to determine the best panel of markers that can be used to assist in discriminating between them. Sixty epithelioid mesotheliomas and 80 breast carcinomas (40 triple negative and 40 estrogen receptor positive) were investigated for expression of the positive mesothelioma markers calretinin, keratin 5/6, mesothelin, podoplanin, thrombomodulin, and WT1; the positive carcinoma marker claudin 4; and the breast-associated markers gross cystic disease fluid protein 15 (GCDFP-15), mammaglobin, and GATA3. All of the epithelioid mesotheliomas reacted for calretinin and keratin 5/6, 93% for WT1; 88% for podoplanin; 77% for thrombomodulin; 23% for GATA3; and 0% for claudin 4, GCDFP-15, and mammaglobin, respectively. Of the triple-negative breast carcinomas, 100% expressed claudin 4; 5%, keratin 5/6; 30%, GATA3; 18%, mammaglobin; 15%, GCDFP-15; 56%, mesothelin; 38%, calretinin; 18%, thrombomodulin; 5%, WT1; and 3%, podoplanin. Among the estrogen receptor-positive breast carcinomas, 100% were claudin 4 and GATA3 positive; 70% expressed GCDFP-15; 63%, mammaglobin; 13%, calretinin; 13%, thrombomodulin; 8%, WT1; 5%, keratin 5/6; 3%, mesothelin; and 0%, podoplanin. It is concluded that podoplanin and WT1 are the best positive mesothelioma markers for differentiating epithelioid mesotheliomas from breast carcinomas. An accurate differential diagnosis can be reached with the use of these two markers in combination with the breast-associated markers GCDFP-15, mammaglobin, and GATA3.

Comparative proteomic analysis of malignant pleural mesothelioma evidences an altered expression of nuclear lamin and filament-related proteins

PURPOSE

Malignant mesothelioma is a neoplastic disease linked to asbestos exposure whose diagnosis is limited, so detection methods for an early diagnosis and treatment result essential. Here, we compared proteomic profiles of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) and benign biopsies to search potential biomarkers useful in differential diagnosis.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Tissue biopsies were obtained from 53 patients who were subjected to a diagnostic thoracoscopy. 2DE/MS based approach was used for proteomic analysis and protein validation was carried out by Western blot analysis versus benign and lung carcinoma samples.

RESULTS

Among the proteins identified we confirmed known MPM biomarkers such as calretinin and suggested the new ones as prelamin A/C, desmin, vimentin, calretinin, fructose-bisphosphate aldolase A, myosin regulatory light chain 2, ventricular/cardiac muscle isoform, myosin light chain 3 and myosin light chain 6B. Ingenuity software was used to identify the biological processes to which these proteins belong and to construct a potential network.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Overall, our results suggest potential biomarkers that can be useful in occupational medicine for the early identification of the onset of disease in health surveillance of past asbestos-exposed workers, for monitoring the progress of disease and for assessing the response to treatment.

Screening and functional analysis of a differential protein profile of human breast cancer

To improve the understanding of the enriched functions of proteins and to identify potential biomarkers in human breast cancer, the present study constructed a differentially expressed protein profile by screening immunohistochemistry maps of human breast cancer proteins. A total of 1,688 proteins were found to be differentially expressed in human breast cancer, including 773 upregulated and 915 downregulated proteins. Of these proteins, secreted and membrane proteins were screened and clustered, and more enriched biological functions and pathways were presented in the upregulated protein profiles. Furthermore, altered serum levels of peroxiredoxin (PRDX)2, PRDX6, cathepsin (CTS)B and CTSD were detected by ELISA assay. The present study provides a novel global mapping of potential breast cancer biomarkers that could be used as background to identify the altered pathways in human breast cancer, as well as potential cancer targets.

Use of automated image analysis in evaluation of Mesothelioma Tissue Microarray (TMA) from National Mesothelioma Virtual Bank

The National Mesothelioma Virtual Bank (NMVB) was established to provide annotated biospecimens to the mesothelioma research community. The resource provides tissue microarrays (TMA) to evaluate the biomarkers along with a variety of other resected mesothelioma specimens. In this manuscript, we describe the immunohistochemical evaluation of the mesothelioma TMA with three key antibodies that are used in making the diagnosis of mesothelioma, and compared the immunohistochemical assessment between manual scoring and image analysis. The TMA was assessed for the immunohistochemical expression of calretinin (N=39), cytokeratin (CK) 5/6 (N=33), and D2-40 (N=37). Immunohistochemistry was evaluated by semi-quantitative (manual) scoring using light microscope (MS) and by automated image analysis (AS). Calretinin staining was seen in both cytoplasmic and nuclear locations. CK5/6 stain was localized to the cytoplasm. D2-40 stain showed only membranous expression in our cases. • Based on the pathologist’s scores, calretinin was positive in 31 of the 39 cases (80%), CK 5/6 in 15 of the 33 cases (46%) and D2-40 in 18 of the 37 cases (49%). • The percent-positive agreement between manual scores and image analysis was 90% (35/39), 94% (31/33), and 95% (35/37) for calretinin, CK 5/6, and D2-40, respectively. There was a substantial agree-ment between manual and automated scores for calretinin (kappa = 0.614) and an almost perfect agreement for CK5/6 (kappa = 0.879) and D2-40 (kappa = 0.892). Our study confirms that the immunohistochemical staining pattern of mesotheliomas in the NMVB UPMC TMA is similar to other studies. Our findings also show that automated image analysis provides similar results to manual scoring by pathologists, and provides a reproducible, objective, and accurate platform for immunohistochemical assessment of biomarker expression.