Value of immunohistochemistry in the differential diagnosis of pleural sarcomatoid mesothelioma from lung sarcomatoid carcinoma

Diagnostic performance of immunohistochemistry markers for malignant pleural mesothelioma diagnosis and subtypes. A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) poses diagnostic challenges due to its resemblance to benign pleural pathologies and different histological subtypes. Several immunohistochemistry markers have been employed to aid in accurate diagnosis.

METHODS

The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of various immunohistochemistry markers in malignant pleural mesothelioma diagnosis and its histological subtypes. Following the PRISMA guidelines, we systematically searched the literature for articles on using different immunohistochemical markers in MPM and its histological subtypes. EMBASE, LILACS, MEDLINE, and Virtual Health Library were searched for studies published up to August 2023. We used the QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies) criteria to assess the quality of the included articles. Meta-analyses were performed to determine prevalence using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

103 studies met the inclusion criteria, comprising a diverse range of immunohistochemistry markers. EMA and desmin-loss exhibited high sensitivity (96% and 92%, respectively) in distinguishing malignant pleural mesothelioma from benign pleural pathologies. Specificity was notably high for both BAP1-loss and survivin expression at 100%. Subtype-specific analyses demonstrated that EMA and HEG1 were sensitive markers for epithelioid mesothelioma, while GLUT1 showed high sensitivity for sarcomatoid mesothelioma. In cases comparing epithelioid mesothelioma and lung adenocarcinoma, CAM5.2 and calretinin displayed high sensitivity, while WT1 and BAP1-loss demonstrated exceptional specificity for malignant epithelioid mesothelioma. In the case of sarcomatoid mesothelioma and sarcomatoid lung carcinoma, GATA3 exhibited the most heightened sensitivity, while GATA3 and D2-40 displayed the best specificity for sarcomatoid malignant mesothelioma diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Immunohistochemistry markers are essential in accurately diagnosing malignant pleural mesothelioma and its histological subtypes. This systematic review and meta-analysis provide a comprehensive insight into the diagnostic performance of these markers, facilitating their potential clinical utility in the discrimination of malignant pleural mesothelioma from other pleural pathologies and the differentiation of malignant pleural mesothelioma subtypes.

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

CONTEXT.—

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

OBJECTIVE.—

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

DATA SOURCES.—

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

CONCLUSIONS.—

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

Loss of Methylthioadenosine Phosphorylase by Immunohistochemistry Is Common in Pulmonary Sarcomatoid Carcinoma and Sarcomatoid Mesothelioma

OBJECTIVES

Differentiating malignant pleural mesothelioma from benign reactive mesothelial processes can be quite challenging. Ancillary tests such as BRCA1-associated protein 1 (BAP1) immunohistochemistry and p16 fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) are helpful tools to aid in this distinction. Immunohistochemistry for methylthioadenosine phosphorylase (MTAP) has recently been proposed as an effective surrogate marker for p16 FISH and is an attractive alternative test due to shorter turnaround time. There are little data regarding the specificity of MTAP loss for mesothelioma or whether it may be useful to distinguish mesothelioma from the most common entity in the differential diagnosis, sarcomatoid carcinoma.

METHODS

We studied well-characterized cases of sarcomatoid carcinoma (n = 34) and sarcomatoid mesothelioma (n = 62), which were stained for MTAP (clone 2G4) and BAP1 (clone C-4).

RESULTS

Loss of MTAP expression was observed in 17 (50%) of 34 pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinomas; BAP1 expression was retained in all of the cases in which it was performed (n = 31). MTAP expression was lost in 38 (61%) of 62 sarcomatoid mesotheliomas; BAP1 was lost in 6 (10%) of 62. In the six cases with BAP1 loss, five also had loss of MTAP, while MTAP expression was retained in one.

CONCLUSIONS

Loss of MTAP expression by immunohistochemistry is common in pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinoma, as it is present in half of cases. This rate is similar to what is observed in sarcomatoid mesothelioma (61%). Therefore, this stain is not useful to distinguish between these two malignancies. MTAP loss is more common than BAP1 loss in the setting of sarcomatoid mesothelioma (61% vs 10%, respectively).

Pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinoma mimicking pleural mesothelioma: A case report

INTRODUCTION

Pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinoma (PSC) is an extremely rare biphasic tumor characterized by a mixture of malignant epithelial and mesenchymal cells. Owing to the rarity, as well as the lack of typical manifestations and imaging signs, the rate of misdiagnosis is high. Herein, we present a case of PSC misdiagnosed as pleural mesothelioma in a 59-year-old man.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 59-year-old man presented with recurrent coughing, fever, and chest pain.

DIAGNOSIS

Chest computed tomography showed 2 large and dense masses involving the inferior lobes of right lung, along with slight irregular pleural thickening and a small amount of effusion.

INTERVENTIONS

Chest computed tomography-guided tumor biopsy was performed. PSC was confirmed based on histopathology and immunohistochemistry. The patient refused treatment due to economic reasons.

OUTCOMES

The patient developed adrenal, multiple lung and brain metastasis. The overall survival time was 11 months.

CONCLUSIONS

PSC, despite its rarity, should be considered in the differential diagnosis of lung cancer. Besides, biopsy, histopathology, and specific immunohistochemical staining of larger tissue specimens can be contributing to the accurate diagnosis of PSC.

Sarcomatoid Mesothelioma: A Clinicopathological and Immunohistochemical Study of 64 Cases

Sixty-four cases of sarcomatoid pleural mesothelioma represent the basis of this study. The patients are 51 men and 13 women between the ages of 42 and 79 years, who presented with symptoms of chest pain, cough, and weight loss. Diagnostic imaging showed the presence of diffuse pleural thickening with encasement of the lung parenchyma in all the cases. All patients had surgical resection via extrapleural pneumonectomy. By immunohistochemistry, all cases were positive for cytokeratin AE1/AE3; however, reactivity with other markers including keratin 5/6, calretinin, and D2-40 was seen in different proportions, whereas a few cases showed positive staining for GATA3, WT1, and p40. All tumors were negative for carcinomatous epitopes (carcinoembryonic antigen, CD15, and TTF1). Our findings show that even though the use of immunohistochemical stains plays an important role in the final interpretation, the best results are accomplished by a global interpretation of clinical, radiographical, and immunohistochemical findings. It is also important to highlight that it does not seem to be a single immunohistochemical stain that is pathognomonic of sarcomatoid mesothelioma and that some other stains that are commonly used for other tumors may also show positive staining in a small percentage of sarcomatoid mesotheliomas.

Utility of Immunohistochemistry for MUC4 and GATA3 to Aid in the Distinction of Pleural Sarcomatoid Mesothelioma From Pulmonary Sarcomatoid Carcinoma

CONTEXT.—

Distinguishing pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinoma from pleural sarcomatoid mesothelioma is challenging because of overlapping histology, immunophenotype, and clinical features. Reliable immunohistochemical markers to aid in this distinction would be very valuable. Recent studies have proposed that MUC4 expression is common in sarcomatoid carcinoma but not in sarcomatoid mesothelioma, with the converse pattern reported for GATA3.

OBJECTIVE.—

To further explore the utility of MUC4 and GATA3 in distinguishing pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinoma from sarcomatoid mesothelioma.

DESIGN.—

Well-characterized cases of sarcomatoid carcinoma (n = 32) and sarcomatoid mesothelioma (n = 64) were included. Diagnoses were confirmed by thoracic pathologists with incorporation of immunophenotype, clinical, and radiographic features. Whole-tissue sections were stained for GATA3 and MUC4.

RESULTS.—

Patients with sarcomatoid carcinoma and sarcomatoid mesothelioma had similar mean age and male predominance. GATA3 was positive in 63 of 64 sarcomatoid mesotheliomas (98%; 42 diffuse, 16 patchy, 5 focal), and 15 of 32 sarcomatoid carcinomas (47%; 3 diffuse, 8 patchy, 4 focal). MUC4 was positive in 2 of 64 sarcomatoid mesotheliomas (3%; 1 patchy, 1 focal), and in 12 of 32 sarcomatoid carcinomas (38%; 5 diffuse, 6 patchy, 1 focal).

CONCLUSIONS.—

Diffuse GATA3 expression favors sarcomatoid mesothelioma over sarcomatoid carcinoma, which rarely shows diffuse expression (sensitivity and specificity of diffuse staining 66% and 94%, respectively). Focal and patchy GATA3 expression is observed in both tumor types, and therefore is not helpful in this distinction. Sensitivity of MUC4 for sarcomatoid carcinoma was low in our cohort, positive in only 38% with frequent patchy staining, but it was quite specific.

GATA3 is a useful immunohistochemical marker for distinguishing sarcomatoid malignant mesothelioma from lung sarcomatoid carcinoma and organizing pleuritis

Sarcomatoid malignant mesothelioma (SMM) tends to occur in the pleura and is morphologically similar to lung sarcomatoid carcinoma (LSC) and organizing pleuritis (OP). Because SMM often does not express mesothelial markers, it is very difficult to distinguish from LSC and OP. GATA-binding protein 3 (GATA3) is a specific immunohistochemical (IHC) marker of breast and urothelial carcinoma. We routinely find that GATA is expressed in MM; however, GATA3 expression in SMM and its reference value for distinguishing SMM from LSC and OP remain unclear. Here, we used IHC methods to detect the expression of GATA3 and classic mesothelial markers in 17 SMM, 12 LSC, and 7 OP cases. We detected the following expression rates in SMM versus LSC cases: GATA3 (70.6% vs. 16.7%, p = 0.008), calretinin (52.9% vs. 8.3%, p = 0.019), Wilms tumor (WT)-1 (64.7% vs. 0%, p = 0.000), D2-40 (47.1% vs. 16.7%, p = 0.126), CK5/6 (35.3% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.694), and pan-cytokeratin (CKpan) (88.2% vs. 100.0%, p = 0.498). The specificities of calretinin, WT-1, and GATA3 in distinguishing SMM from LSC were 91.7%, 100%, and 83.3%, respectively, and combinations of any two of these three markers exhibited 100% specificity for SMM. Notably, the sensitivity of calretinin+/WT1+ staining for SMM was only 23.5%, which increased to 64.7% after including GATA3. Furthermore, all OP cases showed partial or diffuse expression of CKpan, WT-1, and D2-40 but no GATA3 and calretinin expression. In conclusion, GATA3 is an IHC marker with excellent sensitivity and specificity for SMM, and the combined consideration of GATA3, calretinin, and WT-1 was best for distinguishing SMM from LSC. Moreover, CKpan, WT-1, and D2-40 had no value for distinguishing SMM from OP, and GATA3 and calretinin were the most specific markers for distinguishing these two lesions.

Comprehensive Molecular and Pathologic Evaluation of Transitional Mesothelioma Assisted by Deep Learning Approach: A Multi-Institutional Study of the International Mesothelioma Panel from the MESOPATH Reference Center

INTRODUCTION

Histologic subtypes of malignant pleural mesothelioma are a major prognostic indicator and decision denominator for all therapeutic strategies. In an ambiguous case, a rare transitional mesothelioma (TM) pattern may be diagnosed by pathologists either as epithelioid mesothelioma (EM), biphasic mesothelioma (BM), or sarcomatoid mesothelioma (SM). This study aimed to better characterize the TM subtype from a histological, immunohistochemical, and molecular standpoint. Deep learning of pathologic slides was applied to this cohort.

METHODS

A random selection of 49 representative digitalized sections from surgical biopsies of TM was reviewed by 16 panelists. We evaluated BAP1 expression and CDKN2A (p16) homozygous deletion. We conducted a comprehensive, integrated, transcriptomic analysis. An unsupervised deep learning algorithm was trained to classify tumors.

RESULTS

The 16 panelists recorded 784 diagnoses on the 49 cases. Even though a Kappa value of 0.42 is moderate, the presence of a TM component was diagnosed in 51%. In 49% of the histological evaluation, the reviewers classified the lesion as EM in 53%, SM in 33%, or BM in 14%. Median survival was 6.7 months. Loss of BAP1 observed in 44% was less frequent in TM than in EM and BM. p16 homozygous deletion was higher in TM (73%), followed by BM (63%) and SM (46%). RNA sequencing unsupervised clustering analysis revealed that TM grouped together and were closer to SM than to EM. Deep learning analysis achieved 94% accuracy for TM identification.

CONCLUSION

These results revealed that the TM pattern should be classified as non-EM or at minimum as a subgroup of the SM type.

An Algorithmic Immunohistochemical Approach to Define Tumor Type and Assign Site of Origin

Immunohistochemistry represents an indispensable complement to an epidemiology and morphology-driven approach to tumor diagnosis and site of origin assignment. This review reflects the state of my current practice, based on 15-years' experience in Pathology and a deep-dive into the literature, always striving to be better equipped to answer the age old questions, "What is it, and where is it from?" The tables and figures in this manuscript are the ones I "pull up on the computer" when I am teaching at the microscope and turn to myself when I am (frequently) stuck. This field is so exciting because I firmly believe that, through the application of next-generation immunohistochemistry, we can provide better answers than ever before. Specific topics covered in this review include (1) broad tumor classification and associated screening markers; (2) the role of cancer epidemiology in determining pretest probability; (3) broad-spectrum epithelial markers; (4) noncanonical expression of broad tumor class screening markers; (5) a morphologic pattern-based approach to poorly to undifferentiated malignant neoplasms; (6) a morphologic and immunohistochemical approach to define 4 main carcinoma types; (7) CK7/CK20 coordinate expression; (8) added value of semiquantitative immunohistochemical stain assessment; algorithmic immunohistochemical approaches to (9) "garden variety" adenocarcinomas presenting in the liver, (10) large polygonal cell adenocarcinomas, (11) the distinction of primary surface ovarian epithelial tumors with mucinous features from metastasis, (12) tumors presenting at alternative anatomic sites, (13) squamous cell carcinoma versus urothelial carcinoma, and neuroendocrine neoplasms, including (14) the distinction of pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma from well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor, site of origin assignment in (15) well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor and (16) poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma, and (17) the distinction of well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor G3 from poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma; it concludes with (18) a discussion of diagnostic considerations in the broad-spectrum keratin/CD45/S-100-"triple-negative" neoplasm.

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.

Calretinin-expressing lung adenocarcinoma: Distinct characteristics of advanced stages, smoker-type features, and rare expression of other mesothelial markers are useful to differentiate epithelioid mesothelioma

Calretinin, a mesothelioma marker, is sometimes expressed in lung cancer, which may complicate the differential diagnosis of mesothelioma. Here, the clinicopathological and immunohistochemical characteristics of calretinin-positive lung cancer were examined to reduce confusion with malignant mesothelioma. Calretinin expression in 307 consecutive cases of lung cancer was evaluated immunohistochemically. Survival was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. Calretinin expression was identified in 67 (22%) tumors, including those with partial and weak expression [15% (37/250) of adenocarcinomas, 54% (25/46) of squamous cell carcinomas, 75% (3/4) of adenosquamous carcinomas, and 29% (2/7) of sarcomatoid carcinomas]. In calretinin-positive adenocarcinoma (n = 37), expression percentages of Wilms tumor-1, podoplanin, thyroid transcription factor-1, and claudin-4 were 6, 3, 52, 82%, respectively, whereas in calretinin-positive squamous cell carcinoma (n = 25) the percentages were 8, 12, 12, 68%, respectively, indicating that other mesothelial markers were only rarely expressed and that claudin-4 expression was common. Although not an independent marker, calretinin expression was associated with a poor prognosis for stage I tumors of adenocarcinoma (p < 0.001) and of all histological subtypes (p < 0.001). In conclusion, calretinin-positive lung tumors share characteristics with those of smokers and advanced stages and can be differentiated from mesothelioma with the use of other mesothelial and epithelial markers.

Heterologous sarcomatoid pleural mesothelioma with osteosarcomatous differentiation: a report of autopsy case that accomplished trimodality therapy and review of the literature

Heterologous mesothelioma is a very rare subtype of sarcomatoid mesothelioma characterized by the presence of malignant heterologous elements. A 69-year-old man with a strong history of asbestos exposure presented with a 5-cm mass in his chest wall, destroying the right 5th rib and spreading along the parietal pleura, on a CT. Biopsy revealed heterologous mesothelioma with osteosarcomatous elements, following which left extrapleural pneumonectomy was performed with combined resection of pericardium, hemidiaphragm, and 4th, 5th, and 6th costal segments. A small cytokeratin-positive epithelioid component in the resected tumor definitively confirmed the diagnosis. Post-operative chemotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy were undertaken. After 12-month disease-free period post treatment, rapid intraperitoneal recurrence resulted in death. Autopsy revealed no tumors in the left thorax. We present here a case of heterologous osteosarcomatous pleural mesothelioma that followed a unique clinical course after trimodality therapy. In addition, literature of 54 cases of the similar heterologous mesothelioma was reviewed.

Pulmonary Sarcomatoid Carcinomas: A Review

Pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinomas belong to a group of neoplasms that remain incompletely understood. They are rare tumors of the bronchopulmonary system that incorporate a wide range of neoplasms that by definition contain a sarcomatoid component characterized by spindle or giant cells. Such classification has led to a heterogenous tumor category that includes neoplasms with different clinical, morphologic, and prognostic features. To date, the histopathologic diagnosis of pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinomas does not require the use of ancillary testing and is based on light microscopic criteria alone. However, with recent advances in immunohistochemical and molecular methods, it is becoming increasingly clear that pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinomas represent poorly differentiated or "dedifferentiated" variants of conventional non-small cell carcinomas with similar immunophenotype and molecular signatures. This review summarizes the latest insights and concepts of these unusual tumors and outlines future directions with emphasis on tumor classification and patient management.

New Insights on Diagnostic Reproducibility of Biphasic Mesotheliomas: A Multi-Institutional Evaluation by the International Mesothelioma Panel From the MESOPATH Reference Center

INTRODUCTION

The 2015 WHO classification of tumors categorized malignant mesothelioma into epithelioid, biphasic (BMM), and sarcomatoid (SMM) for prognostic relevance and treatment decisions. The survival of BMM is suspected to correlate with the amount of the sarcomatoid component. The criteria for a sarcomatoid component and the interobserver variability between pathologists for identifying this component are not well described. In ambiguous cases, a "transitional" (TMM) subtype has been proposed but was not accepted as a specific subtype in the 2015 WHO classification. The aims of this study were to evaluate the interobserver agreement in the diagnosis of BMM, to determine the nature and the significance of TMM subtype, and to relate the percentage of sarcomatoid component with survival. The value of staining for BRCA-1-associated protein (BAP1) and CDKN2A(p16) fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) were also assessed with respect to each of the tumoral components.

METHODS

The study was conducted by the International Mesothelioma Panel supported by the French National Cancer Institute, the network of rare cancer (EURACAN) and in collaboration with the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC). The patient cases include a random group of 42 surgical biopsy samples diagnosed as BMM with evaluation of SMM component by the French Panel of MESOPATH experts was selected from the total series of 971 BMM cases collected from 1998 to 2016. Fourteen international pathologists with expertise in mesothelioma reviewed digitally scanned slides (hematoxylin and eosin - stained and pan-cytokeratin) without knowledge of prior diagnosis or outcome. Cases with at least 7 of 14 pathologists recognizing TMM features were selected as a TMM group. Demographic, clinical, histopathologic, treatment, and follow-up data were retrieved from the MESOBANK database. BAP1 (clone C-4) loss and CDKN2A(p16) homozygous deletion (HD) were assessed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and FISH, respectively. Kappa statistics were applied for interobserver agreement and multivariate analysis with Cox regression adjusted for age and gender was performed for survival analysis.

RESULTS

The 14 panelists recorded a total of 544 diagnoses. The interobserver correlation was moderate (weighted Kappa = 0.45). Of the cases originally classified as BMM by MESOPATH, the reviewers agreed in 71% of cases (385 of 544 opinions), with cases classified as pure epithelioid in 17% (93 of 544), and pure sarcomatoid in 12% (66 of 544 opinions). Diagnosis of BMM was made on morphology or IHC alone in 23% of the cases and with additional assessment of IHC in 77% (402 of 544). The median overall survival (OS) of the 42 BMM cases was 8 months. The OS for BMM was significantly different from SMM and epithelioid malignant mesothelioma (p < 0.0001). In BMM, a sarcomatoid component of less than 80% correlated with a better survival (p = 0.02). There was a significant difference in survival between BMM with TMM showing a median survival at 6 months compared to 12 months for those without TMM (p < 0.0001). BAP1 loss was observed in 50% (21 of 42) of the total cases and in both components in 26%. We also compared the TMM group to that of more aggressive patterns of epithelioid subtypes of mesothelioma (solid and pleomorphic of our large MESOPATH cohort). The curve of transitional type was persistently close to the OS curve of the sarcomatoid component. The group of sarcomatoid, transitional, and pleomorphic mesothelioma were very close to each other. We then considered the contribution of BAP1 immunostaining and loss of CDKN2A(p16) by FISH. BAP1 loss was observed in 50% (21 of 41) of the total cases and in both component in 27% of the cases (11 of 41). There was no significant difference in BAP1 loss between the TMM and non-TMM groups. HD CDKN2A(p16) was detected in 74% of the total cases with no significant difference between the TMM and non-TMM groups. In multivariate analysis, TMM morphology was an indicator of poor prognosis with a hazard ratio = 3.2; 95% confidence interval: 1.6 - 8.0; and p = 0.003 even when compared to the presence of HD CDKN2A(p16) on sarcomatoid component (hazard ratio = 4.5; 95% confidence interval: 1.2 - 16.3, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The interobserver concordance among the international mesothelioma and French mesothelioma panel suggests clinical utility for an updated definition of biphasic mesothelioma that allows better stratification of patients into risk groups for treatment decisions, systemic anticancer therapy, or selection for surgery or palliation. We also have shown the usefulness of FISH detection of CDKN2A(p16) HD compared to BAP1 loss on the spindle cell component for the separation in ambiguous cases between benign florid stromal reaction from true sarcomatoid component of biphasic mesothelioma. Taken together our results further validate the concept of transitional pattern as a poor prognostic indicator.

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.

Diagnostic value of D2-40 immunostaining for malignant mesothelioma: a meta-analysis

Malignant mesothelioma (MM) has become a global disease burden for its rising incidence and invariable fatality. D2-40 has been widely used as an immunostaining marker of diagnosing MM, while its diagnostic value has not yet been evaluated. Our study aimed to assess the overall accuracy of D2-40 immunostaining for diagnosing MM through a meta-analysis. A total of 22 studies with 2,264 participants were identified from PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus and the Cochrane database. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of D2-40 for MM was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.84–0.89) and 0.77 (95% CI: 0.74–0.79), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve is 0.93, with a diagnostic odds ratio 40.37 (95% CI: 19.97–81.61). None of the study variates was found to be a source of heterogeneity after meta-regression analysis. In conclusion, D2-40 immunostaining may not give sufficient evidence by itself to diagnose MM and should be in combination with other markers to improve the accuracy of diagnosis.

MUC4, a novel immunohistochemical marker identified by gene expression profiling, differentiates pleural sarcomatoid mesothelioma from lung sarcomatoid carcinoma

Sarcomatoid mesothelioma, a histological subtype of malignant pleural mesothelioma, is a very aggressive tumor with a poor prognosis. Histological diagnosis of sarcomatoid mesothelioma largely depends on the histomorphological feature of spindled tumor cells with immunohistochemical reactivity to cytokeratins. Diagnosis also requires clinico-radiological and/or macroscopic evidence of an extrapulmonary location to differentiate it from lung sarcomatoid carcinoma. Although there are promising immunohistochemical antibody panels to differentiate mesothelioma from lung carcinoma, a consensus on the immunohistochemical markers that distinguish sarcomatoid mesothelioma from lung sarcomatoid carcinoma has not been reached and requires further study. We performed whole gene expression analysis of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue from sarcomatoid mesothelioma and lung sarcomatoid carcinoma and observed significant differences in the expression of MUC4 and other genes between sarcomatoid mesothelioma and lung sarcomatoid carcinoma. Immunohistochemistry demonstrated that MUC4 was expressed in the spindled tumor cells of lung sarcomatoid carcinoma (21/29, 72%) but was not expressed in any sarcomatoid mesothelioma (0/31, 0%). To differentiate sarcomatoid mesothelioma from lung sarcomatoid carcinoma, negative MUC4 expression showed 100% sensitivity and 72% specificity and accuracy rate of 87%, which is higher than immunohistochemical markers such as calretinin, D2-40 and Claudin-4. Therefore, we recommend to include MUC4 as a novel and useful negative immunohistochemical marker for differentiating sarcomatoid mesothelioma from lung sarcomatoid carcinoma.

"Sarcomatoid" carcinomas of the lung: a clinicopathological study of 86 cases with a new perspective on tumor classification

Pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinoma includes a heterogenous group of tumors difficult to diagnose and treat. We report the clinicopathological features of 86 such tumors, including 74 pleomorphic and 12 spindle cell carcinomas, and propose a novel approach to the classification of these neoplasms in an attempt to better guide patient management. The patients were 47 men and 39 women aged 36 to 87 years (mean, 63 years) who primarily presented with shortness of breath, cough, and chest pain. Eighty-six percent of patients had a smoking history. Histologically, the pleomorphic carcinomas consisted of spindle and/or giant cells with varying proportions of conventional non-small cell carcinoma in the form of adenocarcinoma (n=29), squamous cell carcinoma (n=10), or large cell carcinoma (n=18); 17 cases contained a mix of spindle and giant cells only. The 12 spindle cell carcinomas consisted of spindle cells only. Based on the combined histopathologic and immunohistochemical features of these tumors, we were able to reanalyze the spectrum of these lesions and reclassify them accordingly. Statistical analysis revealed an overall survival at 3, 5, and 10 years of 42.9%, 34.6%, and 23.5%, respectively, and a median survival of 15 months. Log-rank test showed that in multivariate analysis, only pathological T stage was a factor associated with prognosis. The current classification of pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinomas precludes optimal triaging of these tumors with the risk of denying patients access to novel treatment. Our proposal for a reclassification of these tumors would more accurately guide patient management and facilitate targeted therapies.

Biphasic Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma Masquerading as a Primary Skeletal Tumor

Biphasic malignant pleural mesothelioma is a rare malignant tumor, usually presenting as a pleural-based mass in a patient with history of chronic asbestos exposure. We herein report a case of a 41-year-old man who presented with chest pain and had a chest computed tomography (CT) scan suggestive of a primary skeletal tumor originating from the ribs (chondrosarcoma or osteosarcoma), with no history of asbestos exposure. CT-guided core needle biopsies were diagnosed as malignant sarcomatoid mesothelioma. Surgical resection and chest wall reconstruction were performed, confirming the diagnosis and revealing a secondary histologic component (epithelioid), supporting the diagnosis of biphasic malignant mesothelioma.

Localized malignant pleural sarcomatoid mesothelioma misdiagnosed as benign localized fibrous tumor

Localized malignant pleural mesothelioma (LMPM) is a rare tumor with good prognosis by surgical resection. We report an atypical case of malignant pleural sarcomatoid mesothelioma (SM) in an asymptomatic 65-year-old woman, who had no history of exposure to asbestos. She presented with a small pleural mass without pleural effusion and was misdiagnosed as a benign localized fibrous tumor (BLFT) on pathologic examination through a surgical tumor specimen. However, seven months later, the patient returned with serious cancerous symptoms. A large recurrent tumor mass was found within the chest wall invading at the old surgical resection site. SM, a subtype of LMPM, was confirmed with histopathogy and immunohistochemisty. In conclusion, malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) can present with typical radiologic finding similar to a BLFT, and has a wide histopathologic presentation in biopsy specimen. A thorough pathologic investigation should be attempted even when a pleural mass resembles benign, localized, and small on radiologic studies.

Advances in the diagnosis, treatment and prognosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare cancer originated from pleural mesothelial cells. MPM has been associated with long-term exposure to asbestos. The prognosis of MPM is poor due to the difficulty of making diagnosis in the early stage, the rapid progression, the high invasiveness and the lack of effective treatment. Although the incidence of MPM is low in China to date, it has a tendency to increase in the coming years. The variety of clinical features may cause the delay of diagnosis and high rate of misdiagnosis. The diagnosis of MPM is based on biopsy of the pleura and immunohistochemistry. As China has become the largest country in the consumption of asbestos, it would give rise to a new surge of MPM in the future. The current treatment of MPM is multimodality therapy including surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy and immunotherapy. Two surgical procedures are commonly applied: extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) and pleurectomy/decortication (P/D). Three dimensional conformal radiotherapy is used to denote a spectrum of radiation planning and delivery techniques that rely on the 3D imaging to define the tumor. Cisplatin combined with pemetrexed (PEM) is the first-line chemotherapy for MPM. The principal targets in immunotherapy include T cells (Treg), CTLA-4 and PD-1. The diagnosis, treatment and prognosis still remain a major challenge for clinical research and will do so for years to come.

An immunohistochemical comparison of two TTF-1 monoclonal antibodies in atypical squamous lesions and sarcomatoid carcinoma of the lung, and pleural malignant mesothelioma

Immunohistochemical detection of thyroid transcription factor-1 (TTF-1) plays an important role in the diagnosis and subclassification of non-small cell carcinomas of the lung in biopsy and some cytology samples, specifically for identification of squamous cell carcinoma (classically negative) and non-mucinous adenocarcinoma (positive in most cases) and for discrimination between lung adenocarcinoma and pleural malignant mesothelioma (classically negative).

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.

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.

Comparison of genomic abnormality in malignant mesothelioma by the site of origin

AIMS

Malignant mesothelioma (MM) results from the accumulation of a number of acquired genetic events at the onset. In MM, the most frequent changes are losses in 9p21, 1p36, 22q12 and 14q32, and gains in 5p, 7p and 8q24 by comparative genomic hybridisation analysis. We have examined various genomic losses and gains in MM and benign mesothelial proliferation by fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) analysis. 9p21 deletion was reported to be less frequent in peritoneal than in pleural MMs. This study analysed various genomic losses and gains in MM by the site of origin using FISH analysis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed FISH analysis using paraffin-embedded tissues from 54 cases (40 pleural and 14 peritoneal) of MMs and compared the frequency of genomic abnormality by the site of origin.

RESULTS

9p21 deletion was shown in 34 of 40 cases (85%) of pleural MMs, and was less frequent in five of 14 cases (36%) of peritoneal MMs (p<0.001) by FISH analysis. By contrast, 5p15 and 7p12 amplification was more significantly frequent in peritoneal than in pleural MMs. No difference between the two sites of MM in other genes was found.

CONCLUSIONS

9p21 homozygous deletion assessed by FISH has been reported to be useful for differentiating MM from reactive mesothelial proliferation, but it should be noted that 9p21 deletion was less frequent in peritoneal MM. Our study suggests that the pathway of the genetic abnormality might vary between pleural and peritoneal MM.

Phrenic nerve paralysis as the initial presentation in pleural sarcomatoid mesothelioma

A 74-year-old man was referred to our hospital because of persistent cough. A chest radiograph revealed an elevation of the right diaphragm. Computed tomography (CT) images revealed a small nodule localized on the right mediastinum. Five months later, the nodule had grown and was diagnosed as malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) by a CT-guided needle biopsy. The patient underwent combined chemotherapy, but the disease progressed rapidly and he passed away. On autopsy, microscopic findings and immunohistological examinations supported the diagnosis of sarcomatoid mesothelioma. Therefore, we diagnosed this rare case as localized sarcomatoid MPM showing phrenic nerve paralysis as an initial presentation.

Immunohistochemical study of 36 cases of pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinoma--sensitivity of TTF-1 is superior to napsin

Immunohistochemistry is often used to distinguish pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinoma from morphologic mimics. Napsin-A is a pulmonary adenocarcinoma marker, but literature on expression in sarcomatoid carcinoma is limited. Thirty-six cases of sarcomatoid carcinoma were stained for napsin, TTF-1, Oscar, CAM5.2, AE1/AE3, desmin, SMA, S-100, CK5/6, calretinin, D2-40, and WT1. Patients were 24 men and 12 women (mean, 70 years; range, 46-93). There were 27 pleomorphic carcinomas, 5 spindle cell carcinomas, 3 carcinosarcomas, and 1 giant cell carcinoma. Cases were positive for at least 1 keratin: AE1/3 was positive in all 36 cases; Oscar, in 34 cases (94%); and CAM5.2, in 32 cases (89%, weaker/more focal). Napsin was positive in 14 cases (39%): 8 diffuse, 3 focal, and 3 rare cells. TTF-1 was positive in 22 cases (61%): 15 diffuse, 3 focal, and 4 rare cells. No cases were napsin positive and negative for TTF-1. Variable staining for mesothelial markers was observed, including positivity for calretinin (12 cases, 33%), WT1 (6 cases, 17%), D2-40 (5 cases, 14%), and CK5/6 (9 cases, 25%). Mesenchymal markers were also sometimes positive (usually focal), including S-100 (4 cases, 11%), desmin (4 cases, 11%), and SMA (7 cases, 19%, 1 diffuse). In conclusion, TTF-1 is more sensitive than napsin for detection of sarcomatoid carcinoma, and no cases were positive for napsin but negative for TTF-1. CAM5.2 is less sensitive than AE1/AE3 and Oscar. Use of a thoughtful immunohistochemical panel is important in the evaluation of sarcomatoid carcinoma because mesothelial and mesenchymal markers can be expressed.

Value of thyroid transcription factor-1 immunostaining in tumor diagnosis: a review and update

Thyroid transcription factor-1 (TTF-1) is a tissue-specific transcription factor that plays a critical role in the normal development of embryonic epithelial cells of the thyroid and lung. Because TTF-1 expression is highly restricted to epithelial tumors arising in these organs, it is, at present, one of the immunohistochemical markers most commonly used to assist in the differential diagnosis of carcinomas of the lung and thyroid. Recent studies, however, have reported that TTF-1 is not as specific for lung and thyroid carcinomas as was previously thought as it can be found to be expressed, although much less frequently, in some carcinomas arising in other organs, such as the ovaries, endometrium, colon, and breast, as well as in some tumors of the central nervous system. Even though this unexpected TTF-1 positivity has been reported more frequently with the recently available SPT24 anti-TTF-1 monoclonal antibody, it has also been shown to occur with the commonly used 8G7G3/1 clone, albeit in a lower percentage of cases. Despite these findings, TTF-1 remains a very useful immunohistochemical marker in diagnostic pathology.

Immunohistochemistry and Molecular Diagnostics of Pleural Malignant Mesothelioma

Context.—The pathologic approach to pleural-based lesions is stepwise and uses morphologic assessment, correlated with clinical and imaging data supplemented by immunohistochemistry (IHC), and more recently, molecular tests, as an aid for 2 main diagnostic problems: malignant mesothelioma (MM) versus other malignant tumors and malignant versus reactive mesothelial proliferations.

Objective.—To present the current knowledge regarding IHC and molecular tests with respect to MM diagnosis, and in particular, the differentiation of the epithelioid type of MM from carcinoma metastatic to the pleural cavity.

Data Sources.—A review of immunohistochemical features of 286 consecutive MMs from 459 cases of pleural pathology, diagnosed during routine practice from 2003 to 2009. A survey of biomedical journal literature from MedLine/PubMed (US National Library of Medicine) focused on MM and associated tissue-based diagnostic IHC markers and molecular tests.

Conclusions.—The search for a single diagnostic marker of MM has so far been discouraging, given the biologic and phenotypic tumor heterogeneity of MM. The use of antibody panels has gained unanimous acceptance especially in the differential diagnosis between MM and metastatic carcinoma, whereas the usefulness of IHC is more limited when dealing with spindle cell malignancies or distinguishing malignant from reactive mesothelium. A great degree of interlaboratory variability in antibody combinations and clone selection within diagnostic panels still exists. Current investigations aim at selecting the most suitable and cost-effective combination of antibodies by using novel statistical approaches for assessing diagnostic performance beyond the traditional measures of sensitivity and specificity.

Napsin A expression in lung and kidney neoplasia: a review and update

Napsin A is an aspartic protease present in the epithelial cells of the lung and kidney. Recent studies have shown that, in lung tumors, napsin A expression is restricted to lung adenocarcinomas, whereas among renal tumors, it is frequently expressed in renal cell carcinomas, especially the papillary and clear cell subtypes. Owing to its restricted expression, napsin A is a useful marker that can assist in the diagnosis of both lung adenocarcinomas and renal cell carcinomas.

Value of D2-40 in the differential diagnosis of pleural neoplasms with emphasis on its positivity in solitary fibrous tumor

D2-40 is a new monoclonal antibody recognizing podoplanin and it is selective for lymphatic endothelium. Several studies have confirmed the reliability of D2-40 in the diagnosis of pleural malignant mesothelioma, but the evaluation of this antibody in other pleural neoplasms is limited. The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic value of D2-40 in segregation of malignant mesothelioma from other pleural or lung neoplasms. Sixty-seven cases, including 36 pleural malignant mesotheliomas, 15 solitary fibrous tumors, 13 pleomorphic carcinomas, and 3 synovial sarcomas, were immunohistochemically studied using a D2-40 monoclonal antibody. Twenty-five (21 epithelioid and 4 biphasic) of 36 (69%) malignant mesotheliomas and 2 of 15 (13%) solitary fibrous tumors were positive for D2-40. The difference of D2-40 positivity between these 2 types of tumor was significant (P<0.001). No D2-40 positivity was detected in pleomorphic carcinomas (n=13) or synovial sarcomas (n=3). These findings showed that D2-40 was frequently positive in malignant mesothelioma, but could also be positive in a small portion of solitary fibrous tumor. These results indicate that D2-40 is a valuable marker for malignant mesothelioma, but caution should be taken when evaluating D2-40-positive pleural spindle cell neoplasms in limited small biopsy specimens, especially when the differential diagnosis includes solitary fibrous tumor and malignant mesothelioma.