The epithelioid BAP1-negative and p16-positive phenotype predicts prolonged survival in pleural mesothelioma

High prevalence of p16 staining in malignant tumors

p16 (CDKN2A) is a member of the INK4 class of cell cycle inhibitors, which is often dysregulated in cancer. However, the prevalence of p16 expression in different cancer types is controversial. 15,783 samples from 124 different tumor types and 76 different normal tissue types were analyzed by immunohistochemistry in a tissue microarray format. p16 was detectable in 5,292 (45.0%) of 11,759 interpretable tumors. Except from adenohypophysis in islets of Langerhans, p16 staining was largely absent in normal tissues. In cancer, highest positivity rates were observed in uterine cervix squamous cell carcinomas (94.4%), non-invasive papillary urothelial carcinoma, pTaG2 (100%), Merkel cell carcinoma (97.7%), and small cell carcinomas of various sites of origin (54.5%-100%). All 124 tumor categories showed at least occasional p16 immunostaining. Comparison with clinico-pathological data in 128 vulvar, 149 endometrial, 295 serous ovarian, 396 pancreatic, 1365 colorectal, 284 gastric, and 1245 urinary bladder cancers, 910 breast carcinomas, 620 clear cell renal cell carcinomas, and 414 testicular germ cell tumors revealed only few statistically significant associations. Comparison of human papilloma virus (HPV) status and p16 in 497 squamous cell carcinomas of different organs revealed HPV in 80.4% of p16 positive and in 20.6% of p16 negative cancers (p<0.0001). It is concluded, that a positive and especially strong p16 immunostaining is a feature for malignancy which may be diagnostically useful in lipomatous, urothelial and possibly other tumors. The imperfect association between p16 immunostaining and HPV infection with high variability between different sites of origin challenges the use of p16 immunohistochemistry as a surrogate for HPV positivity, except in tumors of cervix uteri and the penis.

A Critical Assessment of Current Grading Schemes for Diffuse Pleural Mesothelioma With a Proposal for a Novel Mesothelioma Weighted Grading Scheme (MWGS)

Although there is early support for schemes based on nuclear grade, necrosis and mitotic rate, there is currently no widely implemented grading system for diffuse pleural mesothelioma (DPM). We investigated current systems and propose a novel Mesothelioma Weighted Grading Scheme (MWGS). The MWGS assigns weighted scores from 0 to 10 based on age (≤74, >74 yrs: 0,1); histologic type (epithelioid, biphasic, sarcomatoid: 0,1,2); necrosis (absent, present: 0,2); mitotic count per 2 mm2 (≤1, 2 to 4, ≥5: 0,1,2); nuclear atypia (mild, moderate, severe: 0,1,2); and BRCA1-associated protein 1 (BAP1) expression (lost, retained: 0,1). A score of 0 to 3 is low grade, 4 to 6 intermediate grade, and 7 to 10 high grade. In 369 consecutive DPMs, median survival was 17.1, 10.1, and 4.1 months for low, intermediate, and high grades (P<0.0001). A progressive increase in score correlated with worsening overall survival (P<0.0001). Interobserver concordance was substantial (κ=0.588), with assessment of nuclear grade being the most subjective parameter (κ=0.195). We compared the MWGS to the 2-tiered system discussed in the World Health Organization (WHO) fifth edition. The WHO system predicted median survival in epithelioid (median 18.0 vs. 11.3 mo, P=0.003) and biphasic (16.2 vs. 4.2 mo, P=0.002), but not sarcomatoid DPM (5.4 vs. 4.7 mo, P=0.407). Interestingly, the WHO grading system was prognostic in cases with BAP1 loss (median survival 18.7 vs. 10.4 mo, P<0.0001), but not retained BAP1 expression (8.9 vs. 6.2 mo, P=0.061). In conclusion, the WHO scheme has merit in epithelioid/biphasic and BAP1-deficient DPM, however, the MWGS can be used for risk stratification of all DPMs, regardless of histologic subtype and BAP1 status.

Comparison of Nuclear Grade, Necrosis, and Histologic Subtype Between Biopsy and Resection in Pleural Malignant Mesothelioma: An International Multi-Institutional Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Numerous studies on malignant mesothelioma (MM) highlight the prognostic importance of histologic subtype, nuclear grade, and necrosis. This study compares these parameters in paired biopsy and resection specimens of pleural MM.

METHODS

Histologic subtype, percentage of epithelioid morphology, nuclear grade, and the presence or absence of necrosis were compared in 429 paired biopsies and resection specimens of pleural MM from 19 institutions.

RESULTS

Histologic subtype was concordant in 81% of cases (κ = 0.58). When compared with resection specimens, epithelioid morphology at biopsy had a positive predictive value (PPV) of 78.9% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 93.5%; sarcomatoid morphology showed high PPV (92.9%) and NPV (99.3%), and biphasic morphology PPV was 89.7% and NPV was 79.7%. Agreement of the percentage of epithelioid morphology was fair (κ = 0.27). Nuclear grade and necrosis were concordant in 75% (κ = 0.59) and 81% (κ = 0.53) of cases, respectively. Nuclear grade showed moderate (κ = 0.53) and substantial (κ = 0.67) agreement from patients with and without neoadjuvant therapy, respectively, and necrosis showed moderate (κ = 0.47 and κ = 0.60) agreement, respectively, in the same subsets of paired specimens.

CONCLUSIONS

Paired biopsy-resection specimens from pleural MM show overall moderate agreement in pathologic parameters. These findings may help guide postbiopsy management and triage of patients with MM.

Pathology of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

Despite multiple diagnostic toolkits, the diagnosis of diffuse malignant pleural mesothelioma relies primarily on proper histologic assessment. The definitive diagnosis of diffuse malignant pleural mesothelioma is based on the pathologic assessment of tumor tissue, which can be obtained from core biopsy sampling, pleurectomy, or other more extensive resections, such as extrapleural pneumonectomy. Given its rarity and overlapping microscopic features with other conditions, the histologic diagnosis of diffuse malignant pleural mesothelioma is challenging. This review discusses the pathologic features and the differential diagnosis of diffuse malignant pleural mesothelioma, including select diagnostic pitfalls.

Expansion Phase 1 Study of Pegargiminase Plus Pemetrexed and Cisplatin in Patients With Argininosuccinate Synthetase 1-Deficient Mesothelioma: Safety, Efficacy, and Resistance Mechanisms

INTRODUCTION

Pegargiminase (ADI-PEG 20; ADI) degrades arginine and potentiates pemetrexed (Pem) cytotoxicity in argininosuccinate synthetase 1 (ASS1)-deficient malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). We conducted a phase 1 dose-expansion study at the recommended phase 2 dose of ADI-PEG 20 with Pem and cisplatin (ADIPemCis), to further evaluate arginine-lowering therapy in ASS1-deficient MPM and explore the mechanisms of resistance.

METHODS

A total of 32 patients with ASS1-deficient MPM (11 epithelioid; 10 biphasic;11 sarcomatoid) who were chemonaive received weekly intramuscular pegargiminase (36 mg/m2) with Pem (500 mg/m2) and cisplatin (75 mg/m2) intravenously, every 3 weeks (six cycles maximum). Maintenance pegargiminase was permitted until disease progression or withdrawal. Safety, pharmacodynamics, immunogenicity, and efficacy were determined. Biopsies were performed in progressing patients to explore the mechanisms of resistance to pegargiminase.

RESULTS

The treatment was well tolerated. Most adverse events were of grade 1/2, whereas four nonhematologic grade 3/4 adverse events related to pegargiminase were reversible. Plasma arginine decreased whereas citrulline increased; this was maintained by 18 weeks of ADIPemCis therapy. The disease control rate in 31 assessed patients was 93.5% (n = 29 of 31; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 78.6%-99.2%), with a partial response rate of 35.5% (n = 11 of 31; 95% CI: 19.2%-54.6%). The median progression-free and overall survivals were 5.6 (95% CI: 4.0-6.0) and 10.1 (95% CI: 6.1-11.1) months, respectively. Progression biopsies on pegargiminase revealed a statistically significant influx of macrophages (n = 6; p = 0.0255) and patchy tumoral ASS1 reexpression (n = 2 of 6). In addition, we observed increased tumoral programmed death-ligand 1-an ADI-PEG 20 inducible gene-and the formation of CD3-positive T lymphocyte aggregates on disease progression (n = 2 of 5).

CONCLUSIONS

The dose expansion of ADIPemCis confirmed the high clinical activity and good tolerability in ASS1-deficient poor-prognosis mesothelioma, underpinning an ongoing phase 3 study (ClinicalTrials.govNCT02709512). Notably, resistance to pegargiminase correlated with marked macrophage recruitment and-along with the tumor immune microenvironment-warrants further study to optimize arginine deprivation for the treatment of mesothelioma.

Mesothelioma Biomarkers: Discovery in Search of Validation

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an asbestos-related neoplasm that can only be treated successfully when correctly diagnosed and treated early. The asbestos-exposed population is a high-risk group that could benefit from sensitive and specific blood- or tissue-based biomarkers. We review recent work with biomarker development in MPM and literature of the last 20 years on the most promising blood- and tissue-based biomarkers. Proteomic, genomic, and epigenomic platforms are covered. SMRP is the only validated blood-based biomarker with diagnostic, monitoring and prognostic value. To strengthen development and testing of MPM biomarkers, cohorts for validation must be established by enlisting worldwide collaborations.

Questioning the prognostic role of BAP-1 immunohistochemistry in malignant pleural mesothelioma: A single center experience with systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The prognostic role of BRCA1 associated protein-1 (BAP1) expression in malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a matter of debate. We aimed to clarify whether MPM patients with loss of BAP1 expression have better overall survival (OS) compared to BAP1 positive patients.

METHODS

BAP1 immunohistochemical staining of tumor samples from 60 MPM patients treated at our institution with first-line chemotherapy was evaluated. A systematic literature search was also performed. Only cohort studies that investigated BAP1 by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and reported hazard ratio (HR) values for OS obtained through multivariate analysis (or adjusted for histotype) were considered. A dataset comprising 638 MPM patients was added to our cohort and included in the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

In our cohort, 23 samples (38 %) were BAP1 positive/retained (≥1 %) and 37 samples (62 %) were BAP1 negative/loss. BAP1 loss was associated with epithelioid histotype (p 0.01). Median OS times were 14.8 months (95 % CI: 10.7-29.3) and 18.1 months (95 % CI: 11.2-25.8) for negative and positive BAP1 expression, respectively (p 0.2). At multivariate analysis, again no differences were observed among the two groups (p 0.81). Similarly, the meta-analysis consisting of 698 patients showed no difference in terms of OS according to BAP1 status (HR 1.11; 95 % CI, 0·76-1·61; p 0.60).

CONCLUSIONS

BAP1 expression is not an independent prognostic factor for MPM patients and it should not be considered without taking into account tumor histotype. Future studies should investigate its predictive role in patients treated with new emerging therapies such as immunotherapy.

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.

Diagnosis of Mesothelioma

Mesothelioma is a rare neoplasm that arises from mesothelial cells lining body cavities including the pleura, pericardium, peritoneum, and tunica vaginalis. Most malignant mesotheliomas occur in the chest and are frequently associated with a history of asbestos exposure. The diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma is challenging and fraught with pitfalls, particularly in small biopsies. This article highlights what the pathologist needs to know regarding the clinical and radiographic presentation of mesothelioma, histologic features including subtypes and variants, and recent advances in immunohistochemical markers and molecular testing.

Physician Empathy Interacts with Breaking Bad News in Predicting Lung Cancer and Pleural Mesothelioma Patient Survival: Timing May Be Crucial

This study is the first to examine the prognostic role of physician empathy in interaction with the type of consultation (TC) (TC, bad news versus follow-up consultations) in cancer patient survival. Between January 2015 and March 2016, 179 outpatients with thoracic cancer and a Karnofsky performance status ≥60 assessed their oncologist’s empathy using the CARE questionnaire, which provides a general score and two sub-dimensions: listening/compassion and active/positive empathy. Survival was recorded until April 2018. Usual medical, social and psychological confounders were included in the Cox regression. The median follow-up time was 3.1 years. There was a statistical interaction between listening/compassion empathy and TC (p = 0.016) such that in bad news consultations, higher listening/compassion predicted a higher risk of death (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.13; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.03–1.23; p = 0.008). In follow-up consultations, listening/compassion did not predict survival (HR = 0.94; 95% CI: 0.85–1.05; p = 0.30). The same results were found with the general score of empathy, but not with active/positive empathy. In bad news consultations, high patient-perceived physician compassion could worry patients by conveying the idea that there is no longer any hope, which could hasten death. Further studies are warranted to confirm these results and find out the determinants of patient perception of physician empathy.

Nuclear grading, BAP1, mesothelin and PD-L1 expression in malignant pleural mesothelioma: prognostic implications

For malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), histopathological subtype is one of the most important prognostic factors. Several immunohistochemical stains whose expressions have possible therapeutic implications have been identified in MPM such as BAP1, mesothelin and PD-L1. The aim of our work was to evaluate the clinical significance and prognostic implications of BAP1, mesothelin and PD-L1 expression in 117 patients with a diagnosis of MPM who were diagnosed in our institution between 2002 and 2017. We also correlated this immunohistochemical profile to a recently described nuclear grading and to histopathological subtype. Mesothelin expression, BAP1 loss and PD-L1 expression were associated with histopathological subtype (p < 0.0001), BAP1 loss was more frequent in epithelioid subtype whereas PD-L1 expression was more frequent in non-epithelioid subtype. For epithelioid MPM, BAP1 expression was associated with overall survival (p = 0.034), with a longer survival when BAP1 expression is lost. Necrosis and nuclear grading are associated with overall survival (p = 0.0048 and <0.0001, respectively), with longer survival when necrosis was absent and for grade I. For non-epithelioid MPM, overall survival was not related to clinical, histopathological or immunohistochemical expression of BAP1, mesothelin or PD-L1. In multivariate analysis, grade I for nuclear grading was an independent prognostic factor associated with overall survival (p < 0.0001). In epithelioid and non-epithelioid MPM, we analysed overall survival in subgroups with combined mesothelin, BAP1 and PD-L1 expression. In epithelioid MPM, BAP1 retained/mesothelin negativity/PD-L1 > 1%, and BAP1 retained/mesothelin positivity/PD-L1 > 1% profiles, are associated with shorter overall survival. In non-epithelioid MPM, BAP1 loss/mesothelin negativity/PD-L1 > 1% is associated with shorter overall survival. Our work confirms that nuclear grading in epithelioid MPM is a strong and independent prognosis factor. Moreover, this study on several promising immunohistochemical stains whose expressions have possible therapeutic implications identifies subgroups with a poor prognosis.