Mucin-negative pseudomesotheliomatous adenocarcinoma of the lung: report of three cases

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.

Local recurrence of lung adenocarcinoma 10 years after left upper lobectomy resembling pseudomesotheliomatous adenocarcinoma: a case report

The form and timing of the local recurrence of lung cancer can be unpredictable and unexpected. Pseudomesotheliomatous adenocarcinoma is a rare tumor that mimics malignant pleural mesothelioma both clinically and pathologically. Distinguishing pseudomesotheliomatous adenocarcinoma from malignant pleural mesothelioma on the basis of clinical findings can be difficult; therefore, a biopsy is usually required for diagnosis. Here we report on a 73-year-old Japanese man who presented with extensive dissemination along the pleural surfaces and clinical findings similar to those of pseudomesotheliomatous lung cancer 10 years after undergoing left upper lobectomy for lung adenocarcinoma. This report provides information that will help physicians establish an accurate diagnosis in similar cases.

G-CSF-producing malignant pleural mesothelioma: an autopsy case report with literature review

This study reports a 54-year-old man who was a carpenter by occupation. He suffered from left chest and back pain and left pleural effusion. Peripheral blood showed granulocytosis and high serum titers of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) and CYFRA. He died 20 months later. At autopsy, a pleural tumor located around the left lung and thickening of the pericardium, diaphragm, and esophagus by tumor infiltration was seen. The tumor proliferated in papillary and solid alveolar patterns by neoplastic cells. They were positive for calretinin, D2-40, CK5/6, HBME-1, G-CSF, CK19, and E-cadherin. He was diagnosed with G-CSF-producing epithelioid malignant pleural mesothelioma.

Systemic sclerosis and pseudomesotheliomatous adenocarcinoma of the lung

A 55-year-old man, diagnosed with systemic sclerosis (SSc) for 20 years, was admitted to our hospital for exertional dyspnea and pleural effusion. Computed tomography scan and cytological findings of the pleural fluid suggested malignant mesothelioma. In the postmortem examination, the tumor was pathologically diagnosed as pseudomesotheliomatous adenocarcinoma (PMA) of the lung, classified into pleomorphic carcinoma with adenocarcinoma component according to the new World Health Organization guidelines. This is the first case report of SSc with PMA.

‘Pseudomesotheliomatous’ carcinomas of the pleura: a 10-year analysis of cases from the Environmental Lung Disease Research Group, Cardiff

AIMS

To undertake a clinicopathological study of diffuse serosal neoplasms of epithelial histogenesis which clinically and pathologically mimic malignant pleural mesothelioma.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Over a 10-year (1990-2000) study period 53 carcinomas mimicking diffuse pleural mesothelioma ('pseudomesotheliomatous' carcinoma) were identified. The study group comprised 50 men and three females, age range 33-77 (median 68) years. In 46 (87%) cases there was a history of smoking and in 40 (76%) cases a history of asbestos exposure. Histologically the pleural 'pseudomesotheliomatous' carcinomas could be divided into two broad groups: primary pulmonary carcinomas with florid pleurotropic growth (n = 47), of which 34 (70%) were adenocarcinomas; and diffuse carcinomatous involvement of the pleura by metastatic tumour (n = 6). This latter group comprised two transitional cell carcinomas of bladder, one renal (clear) cell carcinoma, one ductal pancreatic adenocarcinoma, one prostatic adenocarcinoma and one squamous cell carcinoma of parotid gland origin. Follow-up data were available in 35 cases. Regardless of tumour type, survival was poor (median 8 months) and comparable to diffuse pleural mesothelioma.

CONCLUSIONS

Pleural 'pseudomesotheliomatous' carcinomas are uncommon (comprising 6% of referrals), pathologically heterogeneous tumours with poor prognosis. Tissue diagnosis should be obtained in all cases of suspected diffuse pleural neoplasia. By light microscopy and immunophenotype many of the tumours mimicked malignant mesothelioma. In particular, an awareness that all neoplasms exhibiting squamous differentiation may express cytokeratin 5/6 and thrombomodulin is important to prevent misinterpretation. In this respect, calretinin is regarded as the most specific and sensitive mesothelial marker. Misdiagnosis may have medico-legal implications in asbestos-related compensation claims.