Flow cytometry in the diagnosis of peritoneal carcinomatosis

Application of international system for reporting serous fluid cytology (ISRSFC) in effusion samples-a prospective study in an oncology setting

INTRODUCTION

Serous fluid cytology is a cost-effective procedure that can help in the diagnosis, staging, and origin of the malignancy. Recently introduced International System for Reporting Serous Fluid Cytology (ISRSFC) standardizes the reporting of serous fluid cytology in the 5 categories: Category 1: Nondiagnostic (ND), Category 2: negative for malignancy (NFM), Category 3: atypia of undetermined significance (AUS), Category 4: suspicious for malignancy (SFM), and Category 5: malignant (MAL). Here, we present our experience adopting the ISRSFC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We implemented ISRSFC in December of 2019 at our institute and included a cohort of 555 prospective effusion samples. The pertinent surgical pathology, radiology, and clinical follow-up were also extracted to assess the risk of malignancy (ROM) and performance parameters.

RESULTS

The assessment of interobserver reliability indicated substantial concordance (κ = 0.717) between the 2 investigators for serous fluid categorization. A total of 555 effusion samples were classified as follows: ND, 14 (2.5%); NFM, 394 (71%); AUS, 12 (2.2%); SFM, 13 (2.3%); and MAL, 122 (22%). The ROM for the ND, NFM, AUS, SFM, and MAL categories was 57.1%, 9.9%, 66.7%, 66.7%, and 97.2%, respectively, in peritoneal effusions and 57.1%, 7.1%, 66.7%, 100%, 100%, respectively, in pleural effusions. The ROM for NFM and MAL was 0% and 100%, respectively, in pericardial effusion.

CONCLUSIONS

Application of the proposed ISRSFC can help in achieving uniformity and reproducibility in diagnoses and also help in risk stratification in cytology. ISRSFC was successfully adopted by our cytology laboratory and clinicians, with overall diagnostic performance similar to previous studies.

DNA Ploidy Analysis and Cell Block Immunohistochemistry in the Diagnosis of Malignant Effusions

BACKGROUND

Effusion cytology is a major diagnostic tool in medicine and has both therapeutic and prognostic implications. One of the dilemmas encountered is the differentiation between atypical cells and reactive mesothelial cells. The use of ancillary tools can reduce this grey zone and help to achieve a definitive diagnosis.

OBJECTIVES

The main objective of this study was to evaluate the role of flow cytometry (FCM) and cell block with immunohistochemistry (IHC), along with the clinicoradiological investigations, to achieve a final diagnosis in effusion cytology to the maximum extent possible.

METHOD

A prospective study was conducted. Effusion fluids, showing adequate amount and cellularity, were processed for conventional cytology, ploidy analysis by FCM, and cell block analysis, followed by IHC wherever required. Conventional cytological analysis was done by 2 independent pathologists, to look for interobserver variation, if any. The final result was achieved on the basis of integration of the results of the aforementioned studies, cytological details, clinicoradiological information, tissue biopsy findings, and follow-up.

RESULT

A total of 90 samples were analyzed. On cytological examination, observer I categorized 60% samples as benign and 18.8% (n = 17) as malignant versus 58% categorized as benign and 23.3% (n = 21) as malignant by observer II. Observer I reported 19 (21.1%) equivocal cases and observer II reported 16 (17.7%). When both pathologists were considered together, the number of equivocal cases increased to 20. Sensitivity and specificity of FCM were 96.67 and 100%, respectively, and 100% for the cell block. On combining all techniques, the equivocal cases were resolved and a total of 33 cases were reported as malignant. However, 3 cases could still not be categorized and were labeled inconclusive.

CONCLUSION

Conventional cytology combined with cell block IHC and FCM has the potential to minimize the requirement of tissue biopsy for confirmation. If the first sample is used judiciously for all the techniques, this may reduce the requirement for a second sample and possibly also the time required for a definite diagnosis and the initiation of therapy.

Malignant Nonhematological Effusion Characterization by Flow Cytometry

With the exception of hematological malignancies, flow cytometry (FC) is infrequently applied as an ancillary tool in the diagnosis of malignant effusions in most institutions. However, FC may be effectively used to differentiate between epithelial cells, mesothelial cells and leukocytes using antibodies against both cell surface and intracellular proteins, offering the advantage of quantitative analysis. Additionally, FC may be applied to the quantitative detection of cancer-associated molecules, including stem cell markers, as well as assessment of critical cellular processes, such as proliferation and apoptosis. Some of the latter tests may have relevance for monitoring treatment response in the presence of metastatic disease, although this does not constitute routine practice to date. This review summarizes current knowledge regarding the application of FC to serous effusions in the diagnostic setting, as well as in research into cancer biology focusing on clinical specimens. The studies published to date suggest a role for this method in the clinical setting in the context of diagnosis, prediction and prognosis.

Flow immunocytochemistry of marker expression in cells from body cavity fluids

Diagnostic cytology based on the examination of cells from body cavity fluids misses approximately 50% of patients with a proven malignancy. In an earlier study, we used immunohistochemical detection of epithelial membrane antigen expression with flow cytometric detection of DNA aneuploidy to reduce the number of false negatives. In the present study, we have combined DNA flow cytometry with flow cytometric detection of marker expression to analyze cells from body cavity fluids. Seventy-nine specimens of ascites and pleural fluids were analyzed by diagnostic cytology, DNA flow cytometry, and for the expression of the following markers: Ber-EP4, progesterone (PR), MUC4, and thyroid transcription factor-1 (TTF-1). DNA index of equal to or greater than 1.2 was seen in 33/79 (41.7%) of the samples. Statistical analysis of 79 samples in which data from cytology, DNA aneuploidy, and expression of at least one of the markers was available showed that by combining data from positive marker expression with that of aneuploidy, the sensitivity was increased from 58.5 to 100%. In contrast, out of the 38 samples designated as non-malignant by diagnostic cytology, nine had aneuploid DNA content and 16 of the diploid samples had a positive marker expression. Specificity was reduced from 74.7 to 31.6% due to the presence of aneuploidy and marker expression in these samples. ALDH1(pos)/CD44(pos)/CD24(neg) expression has been reported to be associated with human breast tumor stem cells. Some of our samples had cells with this phenotype. Flow cytometry offers the advantage of rapid multiparametric analysis of DNA aneuploidy and marker expression in cells from body cavity fluids based on the analysis of a large number of cells without observer bias. By further developing the use of specific markers and aneuploidy, it may be possible to refine flow cytometric analysis for rapid detection of malignant cells in body cavity fluids.

Detection of tumor cells in body cavity fluids by flow cytometric and immunocytochemical analysis

Measurement of electronic volume versus DNA content of nuclei can be used to discriminate between normal and malignant cells. Epithelial membrane antigen immunocytochemistry (EMA-ICC), a helpful ancillary test in body cavity fluids, is not universally accurate for detecting malignancy in effusions. The current study was undertaken to determine if multiparametric flow cytometry (based on simultaneous analysis of light scatter, nuclear volume, DNA, and nuclear protein content) in combination with (EMA-ICC) could be used for the detection of malignant cells in peritoneal and pleural fluids. We studied 130 body cavity fluids (68 peritoneal and 62 pleural fluids) by conventional cytology and multiparametric laser flow cytometry. EMA-ICC was performed using EMA antibodies and L-SAB detection system (DakoCytomation, Carpinteria, CA). EMA-ICC had significantly higher sensitivity than conventional cytology (79% versus 59%, P = 0.016) and ploidy (79% versus 38%, P = 0.001). Cytology had significantly higher specificity than ploidy (97% versus 82%, P = 0.012). The differences in specificity between EMA-ICC and ploidy (87% versus 82%, P= 0.607) or EMA-ICC and cytology (87% versus 97%, P = 0.109) were not statistically significant. However, assuming serial testing, sensitivity increased significantly for the combinations of cytology and EMA-ICC (79.4%, P = 0.016) and cytology and ploidy (73.5%, P = 0.004) as compared to cytology alone (58.8%). Also, the combination of cytology and ploidy had a higher sensitivity than ploidy alone (73% versus 38%, P < 0.0001). However, the sensitivity associated with the three tests used in serial (85.3%) was not significantly different from the sensitivities corresponding to the combination of cytology and EMA-ICC (79%) or cytology and ploidy (73%). Multiparametric flow cytometry utilizing high resolution DNA, nuclear volume, protein measurement, and ICC, in combination with cytomorphology, may be a valuable tool for rapid identification of malignant cells in body cavity fluids.

A peritoneal dialysis patient with fatal culture-negative peritonitis. Case Discussion

Culture-negative peritoneal inflammation accounts for between 5 and 20% of cases of peritonitis in peritoneal dialysis patients. Diagnostic yields may be enhanced considerably by reculturing dialysate effluents using appropriate collection methods and optimal laboratory techniques (including prolonged low-temperature and anaerobic incubations). In patients with persistent culture-negative peritonitis, consideration should be given to the possibilities of unusual or fastidious microorganisms (especially fungi and mycobacteria) and non-infective causes (especially drug reactions, malignancy, visceral inflammation and retroperitoneal inflammation). In this paper, an illustrative case of persistent culture-negative peritonitis is presented followed by a discussion of the investigative approach to such patients, with particular emphasis on differential diagnosis and the limitations of currently available tests.