Caveolin-1 is a novel immunohistochemical marker to differentiate epithelioid mesothelioma from lung adenocarcinoma

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.

Differential Diagnosis of Epithelioid Malignant Mesothelioma With Lung and Breast Pleural Metastasis: A Systematic Review Compared With a Standardized Panel of Antibodies-A New Proposal That May Influence Pathologic Practice

CONTEXT.—

Pleural mesothelioma is a rare cancer with an often-challenging diagnosis because of its potential to be a great mimicker of many other tumors. Among them, primary lung and breast cancers are the 2 main causes of pleural metastasis. The development and application of targeted therapeutic agents have made it even more important to achieve an accurate diagnosis. In this setting, international guidelines have recommended the use of 2 positive and 2 negative immunohistochemical biomarkers.

OBJECTIVES.—

To define the most highly specific and sensitive minimum set of antibodies for routine practice to use for the separation of epithelioid malignant mesothelioma from lung and breast metastasis and to determine the most relevant expression cutoff.

DESIGN.—

To provide information at different levels of expression of 16 mesothelial and epithelial biomarkers, we performed a systematic review of articles published between 1979 and 2017, and we compared those data to results from the Mesothelioma Telepathology Network (MESOPATH) of the standardized panel used in routine practice database since 1998.

RESULTS.—

Our results indicate that the following panel of markers-calretinin (poly)/thyroid transcription factor 1 (TTF-1; clone 8G7G3/1) and calretinin (poly)/estrogen receptor-α (ER-α; clone EP1)-should be recommended; ultimately, based on the MESOPATH database, we highlight their relevance which are the most sensitive and specific panel useful to the differential diagnosis at 10% cutoff.

CONCLUSIONS.—

Highlighted by their relevance in the large cohort reported, we recommend 2 useful panels to the differential diagnosis at 10% cutoff.

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.

Monoclonal Caveolin 1 Expression in the Differential Diagnosis of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma and Pulmonary Adenocarcinoma: Is it Useful?

In this study we aim to demonstrate the value of monoclonal Caveolin 1 expression in distinguishing between malignant pleural mesothelioma and pulmonary adenocarcinoma. Total of 129 cases, consisting of 68 cases of malignant pleural mesothelioma (51 epitheloid, 12 biphasic, and 5 sarcomatoid type) and 61 cases of pulmonary adenocarcinoma were examined and stained with monoclonal Caveolin-1. Caveolin 1 expression with a membranous and /or cytoplasmic pattern was detected only in 32.35% (n:22/68) of malignant pleural mesothelioma and 6.5% (n:4/61) of pulmonary adenocarcinoma cases. This finding suggests that the choice of poly/monoclonal antibody for Caveolin 1 in the differential diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma and pulmonary adenocarcinoma is important.

Immunoenzymatic Staining of Caveolin-1 in Formalin-Fixed Renal Graft Showing Chronic Antibody Mediated Rejection

AIM

Caveolin-1 (CAV-1) is a molecule associated with endothelial cell dysfunction in chronic antibody-mediated rejection (CAMR) and considered to be a novel biomarker of CAMR. For immunohistochemical staining to reveal CAV-1 expression, most studies have used immunofluorescent stained frozen specimens, whereas formalin-fixed tissues have not been utilized. In the present study, we examined CAV-1 expression in specimens from CAMR patients using an immunoenzymatic technique with formalin-fixed tissues.

METHODS

Eleven patients diagnosed with CAMR based on findings of transplanted renal biopsy samples were enrolled. Those biopsy specimens were formalin fixed and stained with CAV-1 using an immunoenzymatic method. Dye extent was evaluated by classifying that in peritubular capillaries (PTC) and glomerular capillaries (GBM) in 3 steps. We then compared the Banff scores for peritubular capillaritis (ptc), glomerulopathy (cg), and C4d using those results.

RESULTS

CAV-1 expression was confirmed in vascular endothelium (PTC, GBM), while it was poor in epithelial cells. A Banff score for ptc and cg of 3 points was seen in 3 and 4 cases, of 2 points was seen in 1 and 4 cases, of 1 point was seen in 7 and 3 cases, and of 0 points was seen in 0 and 0 cases, respectively. In PTC, C4d and CAV-1 scores of 3 points were seen in 0 and 9 cases, of 2 points were seen in 2 and 2 cases, of 1 point was seen in 5 and 0 cases, and of 0 points were seen in 4 and 0 cases, respectively. As for GBM, C4d and CAV-1 scores of 3 points were seen in 8 and 7 cases, of 2 points were seen in 2 and 4 cases, of 1 point was seen in 0 and 0 cases, and of 0 points were seen 1 and 0 cases, respectively.

CONCLUSION

CAV-1 expression in PTC had a score ≥2 in all cases, indicating that an adequate level of staining of formalin-fixed tissue was attained with the present immunoenzymatic technique. These results suggest that CAV-1 expression examined by the present method may be useful for identifying endothelial dysfunction.

Oxidative stress and NF-κB signaling are involved in LPS induced pulmonary dysplasia in chick embryos

Inflammation or dysbacteriosis-derived lipopolysaccharides (LPS) adversely influence the embryonic development of respiratory system. However, the precise pathological mechanisms still remain to be elucidated. In this study, we demonstrated that LPS exposure caused lung maldevelopment in chick embryos, including higher embryo mortality, increased thickness of alveolar gas exchange zone, and accumulation of PAS⁺ immature pulmonary cells, accompanied with reduced expression of alveolar epithelial cell markers and lamellar body count. Upon LPS exposure, pulmonary cell proliferation was significantly altered and cell apoptosis was inhibited as well, indicating a delayed progress of pulmonary development. LPS treatment also resulted in reduced CAV-1 expression and up-regulation of Collagen I, suggesting increased lung fibrosis, which was verified by Masson staining. Moreover, LPS induced enhanced Nrf2 expression in E18 lungs, and the increased reactive oxygen species (ROS) production was confirmed in MLE-12 cells in vitro. Antioxidant vitamin C restored the LPS induced down-regulation of ABCA3, SP-C and GATA-6 in MLE-12 cells. Furthermore, LPS induced activation of NF-κB signaling in MLE-12 cells, and the LPS-induced decrease in SP-C expression was partially abrogated by blocking NF-κB signaling with Bay-11-7082. Bay-11-7082 also inhibited LPS-induced increases of ROS and Nrf2 expression. Taken together, we have demonstrated that oxidative stress and NF-κB signaling are involved in LPS induced disruption of pulmonary cell development in chick embryos.

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.

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.

Calretinin but not caveolin-1 correlates with tumour histology and survival in malignant mesothelioma

Malignant mesothelioma (MM) continues to be a disease with poor prognosis and limited treatment options. Calretinin and caveolin-1 expression by tumour in MM have recently been described to be associated with tumour histology, differentiation and consequently survival. In a large, well annotated cohort, we studied both of these biomarkers and explored their association with clinicopathological parameters and survival. A retrospective search of patients with MM who underwent surgery at the Austin Hospital in Melbourne, Australia, was conducted. Clinical history and outcome data were retrieved from patient records. Tissue microarrays (TMAs) were constructed and stained for calretinin and caveolin-1. 'H scores' were derived, taking intensity and distribution of staining, and the cohort was dichotomised using median values for both markers. In the 329 patients evaluated, median age was 67 years. Males outnumbered females by 5:1. Epithelioid histology 202/319 (62.9%) was the most common, followed by biphasic 72/319 (21.8%) and sarcomatoid 45/319 (13.6%); histology could not be confirmed in 10 patients. Calretinin expression was detected in 246 of the 324 (76%) evaluable patients and high expression was associated with epithelioid histology (p < 0.0001). Caveolin-1 was expressed in 298 (94%) of 317 evaluable patients which was much higher compared to its expression in a cohort of lung adenocarcinomas (8/58, 13.7%). However, no association with histology was found (p = 0.409). When taken as a continuous variable, calretinin expression was found to be an independent predictor of survival, alongside histology, neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, weight loss and stage. No prognostic value was demonstrable for caveolin-1 expression and calretinin/caveolin-1 ratio. There was no relationship between calretinin and caveolin-1 expression. In MM, increased calretinin expression is associated with epithelioid histology and better survival. Caveolin-1 is a sensitive MM marker and is expressed in a high proportion of cases but lacks association with histology and survival.

The Role of CD90 in the Differential Diagnosis of Pleural Malignant Mesothelioma, Pulmonary Carcinoma and Comparison with Calretının

Pleural Malignant Mesothelioma (MM) is a fatal disease that has been associated with asbestos exposure. Differential diagnosis between the pleural infiltration of pulmonary carcinomas and MM is rather difficult particularly for epitheloid type mesothelioma.We aimed to investigate the utility of CD90, a cancer stem cell marker, in the differential diagnosis of MM and lung carcinoma, its prognostic significance and compare its value with that of Calretinin. Ninety pathology specimens including MM (n:30), pulmonary adenocarcinoma (n:30) and pulmonary squamous cell carcinoma (n:30) were used in this study. Immunohistochemical comparision of CD 90 and Calretinin was made in all groups. Calretinin was positive in 20 cases with MM (64.5 %), and was negative in 10 (32.3 %). CD 90 was positive in 25 of these cases (80 %) and negative in 5 (16 %). On the other hand pulmonary adenocarcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas showed positivity with CD90, 63,6 % and 73 %, respectively. We think that CD 90 has no place in the differential diagnosis between mesothelioma and pulmonary carcinoma because of the low specificity in spite of the high sensitivity.

CD90 is a diagnostic marker to differentiate between malignant pleural mesothelioma and lung carcinoma with immunohistochemistry

OBJECTIVES

To pathologically distinguish mesothelioma from lung carcinoma, particularly adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

We conducted immunohistochemical analyses on clinical specimens, including 26 cases of mesothelioma, 28 cases of lung adenocarcinoma, and 33 cases of lung squamous cell carcinoma.

RESULTS

We found that CD90 expression was useful in making a differential diagnosis between epithelioid mesothelioma and lung adenocarcinoma, whereas sarcomatoid mesothelioma and lung carcinoma specimens, irrespective of the histologic types, were negative in general. The sensitivity and specificity of CD90 expression in epithelioid mesothelioma and lung adenocarcinoma were comparable to those of well-established markers used for the differential diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

These data collectively indicate that CD90 is a novel diagnostic marker that contributes to a diagnosis of epithelioid mesothelioma.

Value of PAX8, PAX2, napsin A, carbonic anhydrase IX, and claudin-4 immunostaining in distinguishing pleural epithelioid mesothelioma from metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Both mesotheliomas and renal cell carcinomas can present a wide variety of cytomorphologic features and histologic patterns. Because of this, renal cell carcinomas metastatic to the pleura and lung can be confused with mesotheliomas. Recently, a variety of positive carcinoma markers, including kidney-associated markers, have become available. The aim of this study is to investigate the value of some of these markers, specifically PAX8, PAX2, napsin A, carbonic anhydrase IX, and claudin-4, for assisting in distinguishing pleural epithelioid mesotheliomas from metastatic renal cell carcinomas. To do so, a total of 40 pleural epithelioid mesotheliomas and 55 renal cell carcinomas (33 clear cell, 10 papillary, and 12 chromophobe) were investigated. In all, 91% of the renal cell carcinomas expressed claudin-4, 89% PAX8, 60% PAX2, 71% carbonic anhydrase IX, and 29% napsin A. All of the mesotheliomas were positive for carbonic anhydrase IX and were negative for all of the other markers. On the basis of these results, it is concluded that claudin-4 and PAX8 have a higher sensitivity and specificity for assisting in discriminating between pleural epithelioid mesotheliomas and renal cell carcinomas when compared with all of the other positive carcinoma markers that are, at present, recommended to be included in the immunohistochemical panels used in this differential diagnosis. Even though PAX2 and napsin A are highly specific, because of their low sensitivity, they have only a limited value. Carbonic anhydrase IX is not useful.

Mesothelioma with signet-ring cell features: report of 23 cases

Signet-ring cell mesothelioma is uncommon and only two case reports have been published on this mesothelioma variant, both of which were initially misdiagnosed as signet-ring cell carcinoma. Herein are reported 23 signet-ring cell mesotheliomas that were investigated by immunohistochemistry, 12 of which were also studied by electron microscopy. Twenty-one of the cases originated in the pleura and two in the peritoneum. For comparison purposes and in order to determine the value of these techniques in the differential diagnosis of these tumors, seven cases of signet-ring cell lung adenocarcinoma were also studied. All signet-ring cell mesotheliomas were positive for calretinin, keratin 5/6, keratin 7, and mesothelin, 93% for podoplanin, and 91% for WT1; whereas, none reacted for MOC-31, CEA, TAG-72, CD15, TTF-1, napsin A, or CDX2. Among signet-ring cell lung adenocarcinomas, 100% were positive for keratin 7, CEA, and napsin A, 86% each for TTF-1 and TAG-72, 71% for CD15, and 14% for mesothelin, while all were negative for calretinin, keratin 5/6, WT1, podoplanin, and CDX2. After analyzing the results, it is concluded that the panels of markers used in the differential diagnosis of this mesothelioma variant should include those markers that are usually expressed in mesotheliomas (eg, calretinin, keratin 5/6, WT1, and podoplanin), broad-spectrum carcinoma markers that are frequently expressed in adenocarcinomas regardless of their site of origin (eg, MOC-31 and CEA), and organ-associated markers (eg, TTF-1 and napsin A for lung), which allow the site of origin of a metastatic adenocarcinoma to be established. Electron microscopy can be very useful as it permits the identification of characteristic ultrastructural mesothelioma and adenocarcinoma markers, and it also allows a better understanding of the morphologic features seen on routine light microscopy. Pathologists should be aware of this mesothelioma subtype as it can potentially be confused with other tumors that exhibit signet-ring features.

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.

Mesothelioma - Update on Diagnostic Strategies

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) can be a challenging diagnosis for clinicians to make as it is often difficult to distinguish from benign asbestos pleural effusions and metastatic carcinomas. In this review, we present a case of MPM and discuss clinical manifestations, traditional diagnostic techniques, and the role of cytopathologic immunostains and serum biomarkers in the diagnosis of MPM.

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

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

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.

A review of transcriptome studies combined with data mining reveals novel potential markers of malignant pleural mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), a cancer of the serosal pleural cavities, is one of the most aggressive human tumors. In order to identify genes crucial for the onset and progression of MPM, we performed an extensive literature review focused on transcriptome studies (RTS). In this kind of studies a great number of transcripts are analyzed without formulating any a priori hypothesis, thus preventing any bias coming from previously established knowledge that could lead to an over-representation of specific genes. Each study was thoroughly analyzed paying particular attention to: (i) the employed microarray platform, (ii) the number and type of samples, (iii) the fold-change, and (iv) the statistical significance of deregulated genes. We also performed data mining (DM) on MPM using three different tools (Coremine, SNPs3D, and GeneProspector). Results from RTS and DM were compared in order to restrict the number of genes potentially deregulated in MPM. Our main requirement for a gene to be a "mesothelioma gene" (MG) is to be reproducibly deregulated among independent studies and confirmed by DM. A list of MGs was thus produced, including PTGS2, BIRC5, ASS1, JUNB, MCM2, AURKA, FGF2, MKI67, CAV1, SFRP1, CCNB1, CDK4, and MSLN that might represent potential novel biomarkers or therapeutic targets for MPM. Moreover, it was found a sub-group of MGs including ASS1, JUNB, PTGS2, EEF2, SULF1, TOP2A, AURKA, BIRC5, CAV1, IFITM1, PCNA, and PKM2 that could explain, at least in part, the mechanisms of resistance to cisplatin, one first-line chemotherapeutic drug used for the disease. Finally, the pathway analysis showed that co-regulation networks related to the cross-talk between MPM and its micro-environment, in particular involving the adhesion molecules, integrins, and cytokines, might have an important role in MPM. Future studies are warranted to better characterize the role played by these genes in MPM.

Translational advances in pleural malignancies

Pleural malignancies, including primary malignant pleural mesothelioma and secondary pleural metastasis of various tumours resulting in malignant pleural effusion, are frequent and lethal diseases that deserve devoted translational research efforts for improvements to be introduced to the clinic. This paper highlights select clinical advances that have been accomplished recently and that are based on preclinical research on pleural malignancies. Examples are the establishment of folate antimetabolites in mesothelioma treatment, the use of PET in mesothelioma management and the discovery of mesothelin as a marker of mesothelioma. In addition to established translational advances, this text focuses on recent research findings that are anticipated to impact clinical pleural oncology in the near future. Such progress has been substantial, including the development of a genetic mouse model of mesothelioma and of transplantable models of pleural malignancies in immunocompetent hosts, the deployment of stereological and imaging methods for integral assessment of pleural tumour burden, as well as the discovery of the therapeutic potential of aminobiphosphonates, histone deacetylase inhibitors and ribonucleases against malignant pleural disease. Finally, key obstacles to overcome towards a more rapid advancement of translational research in pleural malignancies are outlined. These include the dissection of cell-autonomous and paracrine pathways of pleural tumour progression, the study of mesothelioma and malignant pleural effusion separately from other tumours at both the clinical and preclinical levels, and the expansion of tissue banks and consortia of clinical research of pleural malignancies.

Diagnostic molecular biomarkers for malignant pleural effusions

Malignant pleural effusions (MPEs) are a common and important cause of cancer-related mortality and morbidity. Prompt diagnosis using minimally invasive tests is important because the median survival after diagnosis is only 4–9 months. Pleural fluid cytology is pivotal to current MPE diagnostic algorithms but has limited sensitivity (30–60%). Consequently, many patients need to undergo invasive diagnostic tests such as thoracoscopic pleural biopsy. Recent genomic, transcriptomic, methylation and proteomic studies on cells within pleural effusions have identified novel molecular diagnostic biomarkers that demonstrate potential in complementing cytology in the diagnosis of MPEs. Several challenges will need to be addressed prior to the incorporation of these molecular tests into routine clinical diagnosis, including validation of molecular diagnostic markers in well-designed prospective, comparative and cost–effectiveness studies. Ultimately, minimally invasive diagnostic tests that can be performed quickly will enable clinicians to provide the most effective therapies for patients with MPEs in a timely fashion.

Benign and Malignant Mesothelial Proliferation

Malignant mesothelioma (MM) is a rare primary malignant tumor of the surface serosal cells. The diagnosis of MM is challenging with a broad differential diagnosis. For many decades, studies have focused on distinguishing MM from other types of cancer; however, benign mesothelial cell hyperplasia, especially in small biopsies, has emerged as a major problem. The features of pleural lesions are somewhat different from peritoneal diseases, and this article primarily focuses on pleural diseases. Thorough interpretation and correlation of clinical, radiologic, and pathologic findings are essential for a correct diagnosis.