Fluorescence in situ hybridization as adjunct to cytology improves the diagnosis and directs estimation of prognosis of malignant pleural effusions

Diagnostic sensitivity of pleural fluid cytology in malignant pleural effusions: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pleural fluid cytology is an important diagnostic test used for the investigation of pleural effusions. There is considerable variability in the reported sensitivity for the diagnosis of malignant pleural effusions (MPE) in the literature.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this review is to determine the diagnostic sensitivity of pleural fluid cytology for MPE, both overall and by tumour type, to better inform the decision-making process when investigating pleural effusions.

DATA SOURCES

A literature search of EMBASE and MEDLINE was performed by four reviewers. Articles satisfying inclusion criteria were evaluated for bias using the QUADAS-2 tool.

DATA EXTRACTION

For quantitative analysis, we performed a metaanalysis using a binary random-effects model to determine pooled sensitivity. Subgroup analysis was performed based on primary cancer site and meta-regression by year of publication.

SYNTHESIS

Thirty-six studies with 6057 patients with MPE were included in the meta-analysis. The overall diagnostic sensitivity of pleural fluid cytology for MPE was 58.2% (95% CI 52.5% to 63.9%; range 20.5%-86.0%). There was substantial heterogeneity present among studies (I² 95.5%). For primary thoracic malignancies, sensitivity was highest in lung adenocarcinoma (83.6%; 95% CI 77.7% to 89.6%) and lowest in lung squamous cell carcinoma (24.2%; 95% CI 17.0% to 31.5%) and mesothelioma (28.9%; 95% CI 16.2% to 41.5%). For malignancies with extrathoracic origin, sensitivity was high for ovarian cancer (85.2%; 95% CI 74.2% to 96.1%) and modest for breast cancer (65.3%; 95% CI 49.8% to 80.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Pleural fluid cytology has an overall sensitivity of 58.2% for the diagnosis of MPE. Clinicians should be aware of the high variability in diagnostic sensitivity by primary tumour type as well as the potential reasons for false-negative cytology results.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42021231473.

Prognostic biomarkers of malignant patients with pleural effusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Pleural effusion is a common clinical problem in patients with cancer. We aimed to summarize all the known prognostic indicators of malignant pleural effusion.

Methods

We did a systematic review and meta-analysis with a systematic literature search. All prospective or retrospective cohort studies that estimated the prognostic factors of malignant pleural effusion were enrolled. Mantel–Haenszel method was used to calculate the pooled hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results

Eventually, we identified 82 studies with a total of 10,748 patients that met our inclusion criteria. The LENT score showed a good prognostic value (HR 1.97, 95% CI 1.67–2.31) so did the LENT score item. In addition, clinical parameters like stage (HR 1.68, 95% CI 1.25–2.25), distant metastasis (HR 1.62, 95% CI 1.38–1.89), EGFR mutation (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.56–0.74), serum biological parameters like hemoglobin (HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.17–2.06), albumin (HR 1.71, 95% CI 1.25–2.34), C-reaction protein (HR 1.84, 95% CI 1.49–2.29), VEGF (HR 1.70, 95% CI 1.18–2.43) and pleural effusion biological parameters like PH (HR 1.95, 95% CI 1.46–2.60), glucose (HR 1.75, 95% CI 1.18–2.61), VEGF (HR 1.99, 95% CI 1.67–2.37), and survivin (HR 2.90, 95% CI 1.17–7.20) are also prognostic factors for malignant pleural effusion.

Conclusions

For malignant pleural effusion, LENT score and its items are valuable prognostic biomarkers, so do the clinical parameters like stage, distant metastasis, EGFR mutation, the serum biological parameters like hemoglobin, albumin, C-reaction protein, VEGF and the pleural effusion biological parameters like PH, glucose, VEGF and survivin.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12935-022-02518-w.

Are we ready to develop a tiered scheme for the effusion cytology? A comprehensive review and analysis of the literature

BACKGROUND

Cytology is widely utilized in the initial evaluation of fluid accumulation in the body cavities. The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of cytology in distinguishing between benign and malignant (MAL) effusions.

METHODS

A comprehensive and systematic review of the literature was conducted to evaluate the accuracy of serous effusion cytology (SEC) against tissue biopsy/resection histology, imaging, or clinical follow-up as the reference test. Risk of publication bias and level of heterogeneity in the included studies was assessed. Meta-regression was performed to assess the effect of various variables on the accuracy of SEC.

RESULTS

Eighty studies met the inclusion criteria for meta-analysis comprising of 34 941 samples; of which 52 (0.2%), 22 202 (72.7%), 194 (0.6%), 711 (2.3%), and 6507 (21.3%) could be reclassified as nondiagnostic (ND), negative for malignancy (NFM), atypical (atypia of uncertain significance-AUS), suspicious for malignancy (SFM), and malignant (MAL), respectively. On follow-up, the mean risk of malignancy for ND, NFM, AUS, SFM, MAL was 17.4%, 20.7%, 65.9%, 81.8%, and 98.9%, respectively. A total of 73 studies were included in estimating the diagnostic accuracy of SEC. The bivariate mixed-effect model estimated the SEC sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio as 73.1%, 99.9%, 7850.6%, 2112.2%, and 0.27%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Serous effusion cytology shows high specificity and moderate sensitivity in the evaluation of serous effusions. A tiered classification scheme can improve the consistency of terminology for reporting SEC results, thus improving communication between the pathologists and clinical team, and quality of patient care.

Diagnostic Utility of Pleural Fluid Cell Block versus Pleural Biopsy Collected by Flex-Rigid Pleuroscopy for Malignant Pleural Disease: A Single Center Retrospective Analysis

Background

Some trials recently demonstrated the benefit of targeted treatment for malignant disease; therefore, adequate tissues are needed to detect the targeted gene. Pleural biopsy using flex-rigid pleuroscopy and pleural effusion cell block analysis are both useful for diagnosis of malignancy and obtaining adequate samples. The purpose of our study was to compare the diagnostic utility between the two methods among patients with malignant pleural disease with effusion.

Methods

Data from patients who underwent flex-rigid pleuroscopy for diagnosis of pleural effusion suspicious for malignancy at the National Cancer Center Hospital, Japan between April 2011 and June 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. All procedures were performed under local anesthesia. At least 150 mL of pleural fluid was collected by pleuroscopy, followed by pleural biopsies from the abnormal site.

Results

Thirty-five patients who were finally diagnosed as malignant pleural disease were included in this study. Final diagnoses of malignancy were 24 adenocarcinoma, 1 combined adeno-small cell carcinoma, and 7 malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), and 3 metastatic breast cancer. The diagnostic yield was significantly higher by pleural biopsy than by cell block [94.2% (33/35) vs. 71.4% (25/35); p = 0.008]. All patients with positive results on cell block also had positive results on pleural biopsy. Eight patients with negative results on cell block had positive results on pleural biopsy (lung adenocarcinoma in 4, sarcomatoid MPM in 3, and metastatic breast cancer in 1). Two patients with negative results on both cell block and pleural biopsy were diagnosed was sarcomatoid MPM by computed tomography-guided needle biopsy and epithelioid MPM by autopsy.

Conclusion

Pleural biopsy using flex-rigid pleuroscopy was efficient in the diagnosis of malignant pleural diseases. Flex-rigid pleuroscopy with pleural biopsy and pleural effusion cell block analysis should be considered as the initial diagnostic approach for malignant pleural diseases presenting with effusion.

Pre-analytical issues in effusion cytology

Effusions or body cavity fluids are amongst the most commonly submitted samples to the cytology laboratory. Knowledge of proper collection, storage, preservation and processing techniques is essential to ensure proper handling and successful analysis of the sample. This article describes how the effusions should be collected and proper conditions for submission. The different processing techniques to extract the cellular material and prepare slides satisfactory for microscopic evaluation are described such as direct smears, cytospins, liquid based preparations and cell blocks. The article further elaborates on handling the specimens for additional ancillary testing such as immunostaining and molecular tests, including predictive ones, as well as future research approaches.

Use of circulating tumor cell technology (CELLSEARCH) for the diagnosis of malignant pleural effusions

RATIONALE

Cytological analysis of pleural effusions (PEs) has a sensitivity of approximately 60%. We hypothesized that the CELLSEARCH technology (Janssen Research and Development, Huntingdon Valley, PA) currently used to detect circulating tumor cells could be adapted for the identification of tumor cells in PEs.

METHODS

This was a single-center, prospective, observational study. Pleural fluid from subjects with undiagnosed PEs were analyzed by CELLSEARCH technology, which uses an epithelial cell adhesion molecule antibody-based capture system/cytokeratin antibodies to identify tumor cells. Subjects were prospectively monitored by periodic chart review to determine the etiology of the PE.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

One hundred thirty-two subjects were analyzed. A malignant etiology was established in 81 subjects. The median number of "positive" pleural epithelial cells (PECs) detected per milliliter of pleural fluid was 6 in the benign group. The number of PECs was 52 in the malignant nonepithelial group (NS) and 526 in the malignant epithelial group (P < 0.001). Unlike blood, there was a baseline number of "positive" cells in benign pleural fluids; however, any cutoff greater than 852 positive cells/ml had 100% specificity. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.86. Nine percent of our cancer cases had high numbers of PECs (>280/ml) but a negative or nondefinitive cancer diagnosis by cytology.

CONCLUSIONS

The pleural CELLSEARCH assay may serve as a valuable addition to traditional cytology and provide useful information regarding the diagnosis of malignant effusions. Major advantages include that it is well standardized, relatively inexpensive, has a rapid turnaround, and is easily available. Our data support the conduct of additional studies of this approach to assist in the diagnosis of malignant PEs.

Lung cancer coexisting with ipsilateral pleural effusion

SUMMARY 

Invasion beyond the elastic layer of the visceral pleura and/or diffuse pleural metastatic spread affects negatively survival in lung cancer. Presence of pleural effusion is also associated with poor prognosis, and image techniques can be of great help for diagnosis. When pleural fluid cytology is negative, thoracoscopy is advisable before attempting tumor resection, in order to detect unsuspected pleural metastases. If widespread pleural malignancy is confirmed, chemical pleurodesis using graded talc (with particles larger than 20 µm in diameter) is the best option, unless the lung is unable to re-expand. In this case, or when a previous pleurodesis has failed, or there is a short life expectancy, placement of a indwelling pleural catheter is the treatment of choice.

Current and future options for the diagnosis of malignant pleural effusion

INTRODUCTION

Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) is a frequent problem faced by clinicians, but tumor pleural involvement can be seen without effusion.

AREAS COVERED

Imaging, pleural fluid analysis, biomarkers for MPE, needle pleural biopsy and thoracoscopy. To prepare this review, we performed a search using keywords: 'diagnosis' + 'malignant' + 'pleural' + 'effusion' (all fields) in PubMed, and found 4106 articles overall (until 16 January 2013, 881 in the last 5 years).

EXPERT OPINION

Ultrasound techniques will stay as valuable tools for pleural effusions. Biomarkers in pleural fluid do not currently provide an acceptable yield for MPE. In subjects with past history of asbestos exposure, some serum or plasma markers (soluble mesothelin, fibulin) might help in selecting cases for close follow-up, to detect mesothelioma early. Needle pleural biopsy is justified only if used with image-techniques (ultrasound or CT) guidance, and thoracoscopy is better for both diagnosis and immediate palliative treatment (pleurodesis). Animal models of MPE and 'spheroids' are promising for research involving both pathophysiology and therapy. Considering the possibility of direct pleural delivery of nanotechnology-developed compounds-fit to both diagnosis and therapy purposes ('theranostics')-MPE and mesothelioma in particular are likely to benefit sooner than later from this exciting perspective.