Cytological diagnosis of mesothelioma in situ versus invasive mesothelioma

New developments in mesothelial pathology

This review article examines some new and some problem areas in mesothelial pathology, four of which are discussed, as follows. (1) The concept of mesothelioma in situ: this lesion is defined as a single layer of bland mesothelial cells without evidence of invasion, but that have lost BAP1 and/or MTAP by immunohistochemistry. Benign reactions can exactly mimic mesothelioma in situ, but a hint to the correct diagnosis is a story of recurrent pleural effusions/ascites of unknown aetiology without radiological or direct visual evidence of tumour. (2) The nature of well-differentiated papillary mesothelial tumour (WDPMT): WDPMT has a long history of arguments regarding its behaviour, and this uncertainty can now be seen to arise, in part, from the observation that some forms of mesothelioma in situ microscopically look exactly like WDPMT. Hence, it is recommended to always run at least a BAP1 stain on any lesion that looks like WDPMT. Both flat and WDPMT-like mesothelioma in situ are strongly associated with eventual development of invasive mesothelioma, but this process is relatively slow. (3) New immunostains for separating mesothelioma from other tumours: here, it is proposed that in most cases, and particularly when the differential is epithelioid mesothelioma versus non-small cell lung cancer, one can make this separation with extremely high sensitivity and specificity using just two stains: HEG1 and claudin-4. (4) Markers for separating benign from malignant mesothelial proliferations: this topic is briefly reviewed, with an indication of which markers are generally accepted and the best utilisation and possible limitations of each marker.

The cytologic diagnosis of mesothelioma: are we there yet?

INTRODUCTION

Mesothelioma is a rare but highly aggressive malignancy with poor prognosis that frequently present with recurrent effusions. Establishing the diagnosis by cytology can lead to early diagnosis and treatment and consequently improve prognosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This review examines the cytological diagnosis of mesothelioma in the context of its historical and morphologic evolution and provides an update of the current reporting systems. Clues to identify the mesothelial and malignant nature of the sample are detailed as well as the supporting ancillary tests.

RESULTS

Cytologically, the samples are overwhelmingly cellular and malignancy is recognized by both architectural and cytological atypia. Numerous variably sized clusters and enlarged cells are easily identified, some with papillary architecture and collagen cores. Recognizing the mesothelial nature of the cells and supportive immunostains are essential to rule out the differential diagnosis of metastatic carcinomas and reactive mesothelium. Current ancillary tests such as homozygous deletion of CDKN2A, loss of BRCA1-associated protein, and methylthioadenosine phosphorylase expression can provide further support of malignancy.

CONCLUSIONS

At this time with the aid of current ancillary tests and in the hands of cytopathologists with adequate experience with the interpretation of effusions, the diagnosis of mesothelioma can be established with accuracy in most cases.

Well differentiated papillary mesothelial tumor: a new name and new problems

Well-differentiated papillary mesothelial tumor (WDPMT, formerly called well-differentiated papillary mesothelioma) is a morphologically distinctive lesion composed of expansile papillae with a myxoid core covered by a single layer of generally bland mesothelial cells. Whether some WDPMT are precursors of invasive mesothelioma is uncertain, and this question is confounded by shallow biopsies of ordinary diffuse mesotheliomas that have superficial areas resembling WDPMT as well as by misinterpretation of some cases of mesothelioma in situ. Genetic analyses on a very small number of published cases of peritoneal WDPMT have shown a variety of mutations/copy number losses that do not overlap at all with those that are found recurrently in invasive mesotheliomas. The newly described entity of mesothelioma in situ usually appears as a single layer of mesothelial cells that have lost BAP1 by immunostaining, but sometimes is papillary and produces a morphologic mimic of WDPMT. We propose that, at least in the peritoneal cavity where most WDPMT occur, there are two morphologically identical but functionally distinct lesions: one is true WDPMT, a process that is probably benign, and the other is papillary mesothelioma in situ with the configuration of WDPMT. For that reason immunostaining for BAP1, and if necessary MTAP or CDKN2A FISH, should always be performed on cases with the appearance of WDPMT. It is possible, but speculative, that the small number of reports in the literature which describe invasive mesothelioma arising from WDMPT are actually describing invasive mesothelioma arising from mesothelioma in situ that looks like WDPMT.

Inflammation of the Pleural Cavity: A Review on Pathogenesis, Diagnosis and Implications in Tumor Pathophysiology

Pleural effusions are a common respiratory condition with many etiologies. Nonmalignant etiologies explain most pleural effusions and despite being nonmalignant, they can be associated with poor survival; thus, it is important to understand their pathophysiology. Furthermore, diagnosing a benign pleural pathology always harbors the uncertainty of a false-negative diagnosis for physicians and pathologists, especially for the group of non-specific pleuritis. This review aims to present the role of the inflammation in the development of benign pleural effusions, with a special interest in their pathophysiology and their association with malignancy.