Comparative immunohistochemical analysis of IMP3, GLUT1, EMA, CD146, and desmin for distinguishing malignant mesothelioma from reactive mesothelial cells

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.

An Updated Contextual Approach to Mesothelial Proliferations in Pleural Effusion Cytology Leveraging Morphology, Ancillary Studies, and Novel Biomarkers

CONTEXT.—

Pleural effusions are common cytologic specimens that can be leveraged to make diagnoses of malignancy that drive appropriate patient management. However, the overlap in morphologic features of reactive mesothelial proliferations, mesotheliomas, and adenocarcinomas can create diagnostic pitfalls in the cytologic evaluation of pleural fluids.

OBJECTIVE.—

To review the morphologic spectrum of benign and malignant mesothelial proliferations in pleural effusions, as well as relevant clinicoradiologic contexts and ancillary tests.

DATA SOURCES.—

Existing scientific and clinical literature as of January 2023.

CONCLUSIONS.—

We can leverage the knowledge of several overlapping morphologic features, clinicoradiologic scenarios, and immunohistochemical studies to enhance the diagnostic accuracy of pleural effusion cytology to appropriately delineate cases of adenocarcinoma, reactive mesothelial proliferation, and mesothelioma. Earlier diagnosis through cytology, particularly in cases of mesothelioma, may positively impact patient treatment options and prognosis.

Comparison of immunohistochemical mesothelial biomarkers in paired biopsies and effusion cytology cell blocks from pleural mesothelioma

OBJECTIVE

Traditionally, the diagnosis of pleural mesothelioma is based on histological material. Minimally invasive effusion cytology specimens are an alternative that, like biopsies, require ancillary analyses. Validation of immunohistochemical (IHC) analyses on cytology, including the surrogate markers for molecular alterations BAP1 and MTAP, is of interest.

METHODS

IHC for eight different markers was performed on 59 paired formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded pleural biopsies and pleural effusion cell blocks with mesothelioma. Immunoreactivity in ≥10% of tumour cells was considered positive/preserved. The concordance between histological and cytological materials was assessed.

RESULTS

The overall percentage of agreement between the histological epithelioid component in 58 biopsies and paired cell blocks was 93% for calretinin, 98% for CK5, 97% for podoplanin, 90% for WT1, 86% for EMA, 100% for desmin, 91% for BAP1, and 72% for MTAP. For 11 cases with biphasic or sarcomatoid histology, the concordance between cytology and the histological sarcomatoid component was low for calretinin, CK5, and WT1 (all ≤45%). For the whole cohort, loss of both BAP1 and MTAP was seen in 40% while both markers were preserved in 11% of the biopsies for epithelioid histology. The corresponding numbers were 54% and 8%, respectively, for the paired cell blocks.

CONCLUSIONS

Generally, a high concordance for IHC staining was seen between paired biopsies and pleural effusion cell blocks from mesotheliomas, but the somewhat lower agreement for WT1, EMA, and especially MTAP calls for further investigation and local quality assurance. The lower concordance for the sarcomatoid subtype for some markers may indicate biological differences.

Chronic Inflammation, Oxidative Stress and Metabolic Plasticity: Three Players Driving the Pro-Tumorigenic Microenvironment in Malignant Mesothelioma

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is a lethal and rare cancer, even if its incidence has continuously increased all over the world. Asbestos exposure leads to the development of mesothelioma through multiple mechanisms, including chronic inflammation, oxidative stress with reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation, and persistent aberrant signaling. Together, these processes, over the years, force normal mesothelial cells' transformation. Chronic inflammation supported by "frustrated" macrophages exposed to asbestos fibers is also boosted by the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines, chemokines, growth factors, damage-associated molecular proteins (DAMPs), and the generation of ROS. In addition, the hypoxic microenvironment influences MPM and immune cells' features, leading to a significant rewiring of metabolism and phenotypic plasticity, thereby supporting tumor aggressiveness and modulating infiltrating immune cell responses. This review provides an overview of the complex tumor-host interactions within the MPM tumor microenvironment at different levels, i.e., soluble factors, metabolic crosstalk, and oxidative stress, and explains how these players supporting tumor transformation and progression may become potential and novel therapeutic targets in MPM.

Cytological Assessment of Desmoplastic Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma in an Autopsy Case

INTRODUCTION

Desmoplastic malignant pleural mesothelioma (DMPM) is a sarcoma-type mesothelioma, comprising approximately 5% of malignant pleural mesotheliomas. Although effusion cytology is commonly used as the primary diagnostic approach for mesothelioma, it may not be useful for DMPM because of the presence of desmoplasia and bland cellular atypia. We report a case, and previously undescribed cytological features, of DMPM that was diagnosed during autopsy.

CASE PRESENTATION

A man in his 60s with a history of occupational asbestos exposure was referred to our hospital with right chest pain. A chest CT scan showed right pleural effusion. Thirteen months later, the patient died of respiratory failure. During autopsy, scrape-imprint smears were prepared and cytology of pleural effusions was performed. The scrape-imprint smear samples showed spindle cells with mild nuclear atypia and grooves with fibrous stroma. Pleural effusion cytology revealed spindle cells with mild nuclear atypia, as well as grooves with loose epithelial connections. Histological examination of the right pleura showed spindle cells proliferating with dense collagen fibers, as seen in the cytological samples, thus indicating a diagnosis of DMPM, which was confirmed by fluorescence in situ hybridization.

CONCLUSION

Cytological procedures such as pleural effusion cytology and scrape-imprinting cytology may help in diagnosing rare tumors such as DMPM.

Insulin-Like Growth Factor 2 mRNA Binding Protein 3 Promotes Cell Proliferation of Malignant Mesothelioma Cells by Downregulating p27Kip1

Malignant mesothelioma is a tumor with a poor prognosis, mainly caused by asbestos exposure and with no adequate treatment yet. To develop future therapeutic targets, we analyzed the microarray dataset GSE 29370 of malignant mesothelioma and reactive mesothelial hyperplasia, downloaded from the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database. We identified insulin-like growth factor 2 mRNA binding protein 3 (IGF2BP3) as one of the significantly upregulated genes in malignant mesothelioma. IGF2BP3 functions as an oncoprotein in many human cancers; however, to our knowledge, this is the first study on the biological function of IGF2BP3 in malignant mesothelioma cells. The knockdown of IGF2BP3 in malignant mesothelioma cells resulted in the suppression of cell proliferation with an increase in the proportion of cells in the G1 phase of the cell cycle. Furthermore, knockdown of IGF2BP3 inhibited cell migration and invasion. We focused on the cell cycle assay to investigate the role of IGF2BP3 in cell proliferation in malignant mesothelioma. Among the various proteins involved in cell cycle regulation, the expression of p27 Kip1 (p27) increased significantly upon IGF2BP3 knockdown. Next, p27 siRNA was added to suppress the increased expression of p27. The results showed that p27 knockdown attenuated the effects of IGF2BP3 knockdown on cell proliferation and G1 phase arrest. In conclusion, we found that IGF2BP3 promotes cell proliferation, a critical step in tumorigenesis, by suppressing the expression of p27 in malignant mesothelioma.

Comparison of effusion cell block and biopsy immunohistochemistry in mesothelial hyperplasia, mesothelioma, and carcinoma in dogs

BACKGROUND

Determining the cause of effusions is challenging and might require a biopsy. Whether cell blocks from effusions are representative of biopsies requires investigation. A previously developed immunohistochemical panel aids in the differentiation of hyperplastic and neoplastic mesothelium in canine biopsies but has not been investigated in effusions.

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to assess cell blocks as an alternative to biopsies and determine whether immunohistochemistry helps distinguish hyperplastic mesothelium, mesothelioma, and carcinoma.

METHODS

Effusions and biopsies were collected from five dogs with mesothelial hyperplasia (group MH), six with mesothelioma (group M), and five with carcinoma (group C). Immunohistochemistry (IHC) for cytokeratin, vimentin, Wilm's tumor protein 1 (WT1), desmin, glucose transporter 1 (GLUT1), and insulin-like growth factor II mRNA-binding protein 3 (IMP3) was performed. Sections were scored for staining intensity and the percentage of positively stained cells.

RESULTS

In paired cell blocks and biopsies, vimentin and WT1 staining were positively correlated for intensity and the percentage of positive cells, although not all paired results were identical. The intensity of IMP3 staining in cell blocks was higher in group M than in group C (P = 0.012), and WT1 staining was higher in group MH than in group C (P = 0.020). For biopsies, the intensity of WT1 staining was higher in group MH than in group C (P = 0.031). In group C, WT1 was negative in all cell blocks and biopsies, and desmin was negative in four of five cases.

CONCLUSIONS

IHC results for the cell blocks and biopsies were comparable for potentially useful markers, such as WT1, which helped discriminate between groups. IHC provided additional information, although results were not always definitive. Further studies on a larger population are required.

Evidence-based diagnostic performance of novel biomarkers for the diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma in effusion cytology

Cytology effusions are often the only material available for diagnosing malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). However, the cytomorphological features alone are not always diagnostic, and cytology samples preclude an assessment for pleural tissue invasion. Accordingly, immunohistochemical, soluble, and molecular biomarkers have been developed. The aim of this study is to provide quantitative evidence regarding the diagnostic performance of novel biomarkers. To that end, a systematic literature review was performed of articles dealing with a loss of BRCA1-associated protein 1 (BAP1), methylthioadenosine (MTAP), 5-hydroxymethylcitosine (5-hmC), glucose transporter 1 (GLUT1), insulin like-growth factor II messenger RNA-binding protein 3 (IMP3), enhanced zeste homologue 2 (EZH2) staining, cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A (CDKN2A) homozygous deletion (HD) testing, soluble mesothelin, and microRNA quantification in cytological samples for the diagnosis of MPM versus reactive atypical mesothelial cells. Sensitivity and specificity were extracted, and a meta-analysis was performed. The quality of the studies was assessed with Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2, and the quality of the evidence was evaluated with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Seventy-one studies were included. BAP1 loss showed a sensitivity of 0.65 (confidence interval [CI], 0.59-0.71) and a specificity of 0.99 (CI, 0.93-1.00). MTAP loss and p16 HD showed 100% specificity with sensitivities of 0.47 (CI, 0.38-0.57) and 0.62 (CI, 0.53-0.71), respectively. BAP1 loss and CDKN2A HD combined showed maximal specificity and a sensitivity of 0.83 (CI, 0.78-0.89). GLUT1 and IMP3 showed sensitivities of 0.82 (CI, 0.70-0.90) and 0.65 (CI, 0.41-0.90), respectively, with comparable specificity. Mesothelin showed a sensitivity of 0.73 (CI, 0.68-0.77) and a specificity of 0.90 (CI, 0.84-0.93). In conclusion, some of the recently emerging biomarkers are close to 1.00 specificity. Their moderate sensitivity on their own, however, can be significantly improved by the use of 2 biomarkers, such as a combination of BAP1 and CDKN2A with fluorescence in situ hybridization or a combination of BAP1 and MTAP immunohistochemistry.

Diagnostic utility of BAP1 for malignant pleural mesothelioma in pleural fluid specimens with atypical morphology

OBJECTIVE

To assess the utility of BRCA1-associated protein 1 (BAP1) immunohistochemistry (IHC) for the diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) in fluid samples with atypical cytology.

METHODS

Pleural fluid samples with an atypical mesothelial proliferation (diagnostic categories: 'atypical' and 'suspicious') received between January 2015 and March 2018 at a tertiary referral centre were identified. Results of routine IHC testing were recorded for each case. BAP1 by IHC was performed and a final diagnosis sought from subsequent pathology specimens, medical records, or consensus clinical diagnosis.

RESULTS

Of 50 cases identified, 41 were reported as atypical and 9 as suspicious. Seven (14%) demonstrated loss of BAP1 staining, 40 retained BAP1 staining, 1 had heterogeneous staining, and 2 had insufficient cells for analysis. All seven cases with BAP1 loss were diagnosed with MPM on follow-up. Of those with retained BAP1, 52.5% (21) were subsequently diagnosed with MPM, while 40% (16) had non-MPM diagnoses after a median follow-up of 24 months. Three cases were not further investigated based on patient and clinician decision. The case with heterogeneous staining was diagnosed as mesothelioma by clinical consensus.

CONCLUSIONS

BAP1 IHC loss is highly specific for malignancy and has value as a rule-in test. Even in a tertiary centre with clinical interest in the cytological diagnosis of MPM this investigation was able to increase diagnostic accuracy beyond routine IHC studies. Cytological criteria remain valuable, as retained BAP1 in an atypical or suspicious mesothelial proliferation cannot exclude malignancy.

CD146 immunohistochemical staining for the separation of benign from malignant mesothelial proliferations

The separation of benign from malignant mesothelial cells is often a challenging problem. Some studies have suggested that immunohistochemical staining of CD146 can be used to make this distinction, but there are marked differences in the reported results. Here, we assessed CD146 expression in tissue microarray specimens of 32 epithelioid reactive mesothelial hyperplasias, 17 spindle cell reactive mesothelial proliferations, 43 epithelioid mesotheliomas, and 31 sarcomatoid mesotheliomas. We found that, although the specificity of CD146 for epithelioid mesotheliomas versus reactive epithelial mesothelial proliferations was high (94%), staining intensity and extent was usually low and sensitivity was poor (23%). For sarcomatoid mesotheliomas versus reactive spindle cell mesothelial processes, both measures (33% sensitivity, 76% specificity) were inadequate. Furthermore, strong staining of endothelial cells and fibroblasts often created difficulties in interpretation. In comparison, BAP1 was lost in 21/43 (49%) epithelioid and 9/31 (29%) sarcomatoid mesotheliomas and methylthioadenosine phosphorylase (MTAP) was lost in 9/40 (23%) epithelioid and 7/29 (24%) sarcomatoid mesotheliomas from these TMAs. There was no association between CD146 staining and BAP1 or MTAP retention/loss. We conclude that CD146 staining is probably not useful for separating malignant from benign mesothelial proliferations.

Malignant mesothelioma in situ: diagnostic and clinical considerations

In situ stages of malignancy have been characterised in various neoplasms. Mesothelioma in situ (MIS) has been a controversial diagnosis, lacking clear diagnostic criteria and understanding as to whether it is truly a premalignant lesion in the progression of malignant mesothelioma (MM). Originally understood as a concept and defined as atypical mesothelial proliferation in the presence of invasion, it has now been suggested that loss of nuclear labelling for BRCA1-associated protein-1 (BAP1) in flat, non-invasive mesothelial lesions can define MIS. This study aimed to characterise BAP1 expression in a cohort of 19 patients diagnosed with MIS (either pure MIS, n=3, or MIS-predominant invasive MM, n=16) and to compare survival between MIS, MIS-predominant MM and MM (n=114) in order to gain insight into the characteristics of MIS. We defined pure MIS as any architectural pattern of surface mesothelial cells with loss of BAP1 in the absence of invasion, but in specimens with superficial stromal invasion we also accepted the original definition of cytologically and architecturally atypical mesothelial proliferation, in the absence of inflammatory features, with or without loss of BAP1. We observed that MIS associated with minimal invasion was associated with significantly improved survival compared to MM (8 months vs 22 months). This suggests that MIS is indeed a precursor to MM and that these cases represent earlier stage disease. Loss of BAP1 was present in 60% of mesotheliomas with invasion, so not all early cases can be detected by BAP1 loss, but our study provides evidence that BAP1 loss may be an early molecular alteration in MM pathogenesis in patients that have loss of BAP1. We confirm that BAP1 loss can be useful for diagnosis of pure MIS in surgical specimens, permitting earlier diagnosis. However, identification of a predominant MIS component with minimal invasion has prognostic and conceptual implications. Whilst no approved therapy is available for MIS, close follow up of patients with BAP1 mutation in mesothelial cells and/or diagnosis of MIS is required to monitor for disease progression and potentially investigate earlier treatment interventions.

EIF4G1 and RAN as Possible Drivers for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

For malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) novel therapeutic strategies are urgently needed. In a previous study, we identified 51 putative cancer genes over-expressed in MPM tissues and cell lines. Here, we deepened the study on nine of them (ASS1, EIF4G1, GALNT7, GLUT1, IGF2BP3 (IMP3), ITGA4, RAN, SOD1, and THBS2) to ascertain whether they are truly mesothelial cancer driver genes (CDGs) or genes overexpressed in an adaptive response to the tumoral progression (“passenger genes”). Through a fast siRNA-based screening, we evaluated the consequences of gene depletion on migration, proliferation, colony formation capabilities, and caspase activities of four MPM (Mero-14, Mero-25, IST-Mes2, and NCI-H28) and one SV40-immortalized mesothelial cell line (MeT-5A) as a non-malignant model. The depletion of EIF4G1 and RAN significantly reduced cell proliferation and colony formation and increased caspase activity. In particular, the findings for RAN resemble those observed for other types of cancer. Thus, we evaluated the in vitro effects of importazole (IPZ), a small molecule inhibitor of the interaction between RAN and importin-β. We showed that IPZ could have effects similar to those observed following RAN gene silencing. We also found that primary cell lines from one out of three MPM patients were sensitive to IPZ. As EIF4G1 and RAN deserve further investigation with additional in vitro and in vivo studies, they emerged as promising CDGs, suggesting that their upregulation could play a role in mesothelial tumorigenesis and aggressiveness. Furthermore, present data propose the molecular pathways dependent on RAN as a putative pharmacological target for MPM patients in the view of a future personalized medicine.

Clinicopathological significance of microRNA-21 in extracellular vesicles of pleural lavage fluid of lung adenocarcinoma and its functions inducing the mesothelial to mesenchymal transition

Background

Pre‐resection pleural lavage cytology is useful to predict tumor recurrence and the prognosis of lung cancer patients. Recently, extracellular vesicles (EVs) isolated from effusion specimens have come under the spotlight, and several studies showed that microRNA in EVs is associated with prognosis. MicroRNA‐21 (miR‐21) is a representative onco‐microRNA, and miR‐21 in EVs (EV‐miR‐21) promotes cancer dissemination by inducing mesothelial to mesenchymal transition (MMT) in the peritoneal cavity. In this study, we isolated EVs from pleural lavage fluid and focused on EV‐miR‐21 as a diagnostic factor with a relationship to pleural dissemination.

Methods

The Cancer Genome Atlas dataset comprising of 448 cases of lung adenocarcinoma, tissue microarray of 144 cases of lung adenocarcinoma, and pleural lavage fluid of 41 cases was used to examine miR‐21 expression levels. The function of EV‐miR‐21 was investigated in vitro.

Results

The miR‐21 expression level in primary sites was associated with a poor prognosis and correlated with pleural invasion of adenocarcinoma. EV‐miR‐21 levels in pleural lavage fluid were associated with positive cytology and pleural invasion in the primary sites, even in cytology‐negative cases. In vitro studies demonstrated that EV‐miR‐21 induces the MMT. Mesothelial cells in the MMT showed functions similar to cancer‐associated fibroblasts, which are an important stromal component in primary sites and disseminated pleural lesions.

Conclusions

EV‐miR‐21 in pleural lavage fluid is important as a diagnostic and prognostic factor. Moreover, EV‐miR‐21 induces the MMT, which can form premetastatic niches of dissemination in the pleural cavity.

CD146 (Cluster of Differentiation 146)

CD146 (cluster of differentiation 146) is an adhesion molecule that is expressed by different cells constituting vessels, particularly endothelial cells. The last 30 years of research in this field have shown that CD146 plays a key role in the control of several vessel functions. Three forms of CD146 have been described, including 2 transmembrane isoforms and a soluble protein that is detectable in the plasma. These CD146 forms mediate pleiotropic functions through homophilic and heterophilic interactions with proteins present on surrounding partners. Several studies used neutralizing antibodies, siRNA, or genetically modified mice to demonstrate the involvement of CD146 in the regulation of angiogenesis, vascular permeability, and leukocyte transmigration. In this review, we will focus on the current knowledge of the roles of CD146 in vascular homeostasis and diseases associated with endothelial dysfunction.

Diagnostic value of GLUT-1 in distinguishing malignant mesothelioma from reactive mesothelial cells: a meta-analysis

Background: Previous studies have demonstrated the diagnostic value of glucose transporter 1 (GLUT-1) to distinguish malignant mesothelioma (MM) from reactive mesothelial cells (RMC), but the results are inconsistent. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of GLUT-1 in distinguishing MM from RMC.Methods: A systematical search was conducted until May 2019 in PubMed, Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library. The revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies (QUADAS-2) was used to assess the quality of the eligible studies. The Stata15 and Review Manager5.3 software programmes were used to perform the meta-analysis.Results: A total of 24 studies, including 969 MM patients and 1080 RMC individuals were explored in the meta-analysis. The summary assessments revealed that the pooled sensitivity was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.62-0.81) and the pooled specificity was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.91-0.98). The area under the summary ROC curve (AUC) was 0.93 (95% CI: 0.91-0.95).Conclusions: GLUT-1 is highly accurate to distinguish MM from RMC.

The Immune Microenvironment in Mesothelioma: Mechanisms of Resistance to Immunotherapy

Although mesothelioma is the consequence of a protracted immune response to asbestos fibers and characterized by a clear immune infiltrate, novel immunotherapy approaches show less convincing results as compared to those seen in melanoma and non-small cell lung cancer. The immune suppressive microenvironment in mesothelioma is likely contributing to this therapy resistance. Therefore, it is important to explore the characteristics of the tumor microenvironment for explanations for this recalcitrant behavior. This review describes the stromal, cytokine, metabolic, and cellular milieu of mesothelioma, and attempts to make connection with the outcome of immunotherapy trials.

Immunohistochemical evaluation of nuclear 5-hydroxymethylcytosine (5-hmC) accurately distinguishes malignant pleural mesothelioma from benign mesothelial proliferations

Accurate distinction of benign mesothelial proliferations from malignant mesothelioma remains a diagnostic challenge. Sequential use of BAP1 immunohistochemistry and CDKN2A fluorescence in situ hybridization is specific for diagnosis of mesothelioma, but fluorescence in situ hybridization is both costly and time-consuming. Early data indicate that mesothelioma shows extensive loss of nuclear 5-hydroxymethylcytosine (5-hmC). We studied 49 cases of mesothelioma (17 epithelioid mesothelioma, 22 biphasic mesothelioma, and 10 sarcomatoid mesothelioma) and 23 benign mesothelial proliferations using a 5-hmC single immunohistochemical stain, CAM5.2/5-hmC double immunohistochemical stain, and BAP1 immunohistochemistry. Estimations of extent of 5-hmC loss were made using the 5-hmC single stain and CAM5.2/5-hmC double stain, and extent of nuclear 5-hmC loss was definitively quantitated in at least 1000 cells per case. Mean nuclear 5-hmC loss in mesothelioma (84%) was significantly greater than in benign mesothelial proliferations (4%) (p < 0.0001). Using 5-hmC loss in > 50% of tumor nuclei to define the diagnosis of mesothelioma, 5-hmC immunohistochemistry showed sensitivity of 92% and specificity of 100%. An immunopanel including 5-hmC and BAP1 immunohistochemistry achieved sensitivity of 98% and specificity of 100%. Extensive nuclear 5-hmC loss is sensitive and specific for mesothelioma in the differential diagnosis with benign mesothelial proliferations. In challenging mesothelial lesions, immunohistochemical studies showing either extensive 5-hmC loss or BAP1 loss indicate a diagnosis of mesothelioma, precluding the need for CDKN2A fluorescence in situ hybridization in a considerable number of cases.

Highly expressed EZH2 in combination with BAP1 and MTAP loss, as detected by immunohistochemistry, is useful for differentiating malignant pleural mesothelioma from reactive mesothelial hyperplasia

OBJECTIVE

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive neoplasm with poor prognosis. Loss of BRCA-associated protein 1 (BAP1) protein expression as detected by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and homozygous deletion (HD) of the 9p21 locus as detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) permits differentiation of MPM from reactive mesothelial hyperplasia (RMH). We have previously reported that detecting the loss of methylthioadenosine phosphorylase (MTAP) using IHC is a surrogate assay for 9p21 FISH. Furthermore, enhancer of zeste homolog 2 (EZH2), which encodes a component of polycomb repressor complex 2 (PRC-2), has been overexpressed in various tumors as well as MPM. In the current study, we investigated whether EZH2 IHC assay, alone or in combination with BAP1 and MTAP IHC, is useful for distinguishing MPM from RMH.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We examined IHC expression of EZH2, BAP1, and MTAP, and 9p21 FISH in MPM (n = 38) and RMH (n = 29) and analyzed the sensitivity and specificity of each detection assay for distinguishing MPM from RMH.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

EZH2, BAP1, and MTAP IHC, and 9p21 FISH were characterized by a 100% specificity each and 44.7%, 52.6%, 47.4%, and 65.8% sensitivities, respectively. A combination of EZH2 and BAP1 IHC, and 9p21 FISH showed the greatest sensitivity (89.5%). Using IHC alone (EZH2, BAP1, and MTAP IHC) also yielded a good sensitivity of 86.9%; this level is high enough for routine diagnostics. There were no statistically significant associations between expression of EZH2 and that of other markers (BAP1 and MTAP IHC) or 9p21 HD. However, a high expression level of EZH2 was significantly associated with short survival (P = 0.025). In conclusion, adding a high expression level of EZH2 to a combination of BAP1 and MTAP loss, all detected by IHC, demonstrated useful for discriminating MPM from RMH.

Pemetrexed-loaded nanoparticles targeted to malignant pleural mesothelioma cells: an in vitro study

PURPOSE

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive tumor characterized by poor prognosis. Its incidence is steadily increasing due to widespread asbestos exposure. There is still no effective therapy for MPM. Pemetrexed (Pe) is one of the few chemotherapeutic agents approved for advanced-stage disease, although the objective response to the drug is limited. The use of gold nanoparticles (GNPs) as a drug delivery system promises several advantages, including specific targeting of malignant cells, with increased intracellular drug accumulation and reduced systemic toxicity, and, in the case of MPM, direct treatment administration into the pleural space. This study aims at exploring CD146 as a potential MPM cell-specific target for engineered Pe-loaded GNPs and to assess their effectiveness in inhibiting MPM cell line growth.

METHODS

MPM cell lines and primary cultures obtained by pleural effusions from MPM patients were assayed for CD146 expression by flow cytometry. Internalization by MPM cell lines of fluorescent dye-marked GNPs decorated with a monoclonal anti CD146 coated GNPs (GNP-HC) was proven by confocal microscopy. The effects of anti CD146 coated GNPs loaded with Pe (GNP-HCPe) on MPM cell lines were evaluated by cell cycle (flow cytometry), viability (MTT test), clonogenic capacity (soft agar assay), ROS production (electric paramagnetic resonance), motility (wound healing assay), and apoptosis (flow cytometry).

RESULTS

GNP-HC were selectively uptaken by MPM cells within 1 hour. MPM cell lines were blocked in the S cell cycle phase in the presence of GNP-HCPe. Both cell viability and motility were significantly affected by nanoparticle treatment compared to Pe. Apoptotic rate and ROS production were significantly higher in the presence of nanoparticles. Clonogenic capacity was completely inhibited following nanoparticle internalization.

CONCLUSION

GNP-HCPe treatment displays in vitro antineoplastic action and is more effective than Pe alone in inhibiting MPM cell line malignant phenotype. The innovative use of specifically targeted GNPs opens the perspective of local intrapleural administration to avoid normal cell toxicity and enhance chemotherapy efficacy.

Updates in Effusion Cytology

Effusion cytology plays multiple roles in the management of benign and malignant disease, from primary diagnosis to tissue allocation for ancillary diagnostic studies and biomarker testing of therapeutic targets. This article summarizes recent advances in pleural effusion cytology, with a focus on the practical application of immunohistochemical markers, cytogenetic techniques, flow cytometry, and molecular techniques for the diagnosis and management of primary and secondary neoplasms of the pleura.

IMP3 as a prognostic biomarker in patients with malignant peritoneal mesothelioma

Malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (MPeM) is an incurable cancer with poor prognosis, and several biomarkers have been suggested for screening of MPeM. The aim of our study was to evaluate the prognostic significances of IMP3 and Fli-1 in MPeM. Diagnostic biopsies of 44 MPeM patients were centrally collected and were immunohistochemically analyzed for expression of IMP3, Fli-1, and Ki-67. Labeling was assessed by 2 pathologists. Complete clinical information and follow-up were obtained from patients' records. Carcinomas expressed Fli-1 in 42 (95.5%) of 44 specimens, and IMP3 in 23 (52.3%) of 44 specimens. Spearman ρ analysis revealed that Fli-1 expression was related to both histologic type and Ki-67 labeling index (Ki-67LI; r = -0.500, P < .05; r = 0.358, P < .05), and IMP3 expression was related to Ki-67LI (r = 0.401, P < .05). A Kaplan-Meier analysis and univariate Cox regression analysis showed that tumor-directed treatment, a lower peritoneal carcinomatosis index, stage I, lower Ki-67LI, and lower level of IMP3 expression had a statistically significantly positive effect on overall survival; Fli-1 did not affect overall survival in the univariate analysis (hazard ratio [HR], 1.026; P = .904). A Kaplan-Meier analysis showed the correlation between IMP3-Fli-1 and overall survival, whereas univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses did not confirm the correlation. Cox regression analysis revealed that IMP3 expression (HR, 2.311 [95% confidence interval, 1.190-4.486]; P = .013) and no tumor-directed treatment (HR, 0.189 [95% confidence interval, 0.086-0.416]; P = .000) retained independent prognostic significance, both with negative effect on OS. IMP3, along with tumor-directed treatment protocols, is a powerful prognosticator in patients with MPeM.

Analysis of YAP1 and TAZ expression by immunohistochemical staining in malignant mesothelioma and reactive mesothelial cells

Gene mutations are involved in the development of malignant mesothelioma. Important mutations have been identified in the genes for cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A (p16) alternative reading frame, breast cancer-associated protein 1 (BAP1) and neurofibromatosis type 2 (NF2). Previously, the utility of detecting the loss of BAP1 by immunohistochemistry (IHC) and p16-deletion by fluorescence in situ hybridization has been identified in several studies. However, NF2-associated examinations have not been performed. The present study aimed to evaluate the expression of yes-associated protein 1 (YAP1) and tafazzin (TAZ) protein, which are associated with NF2 gene mutations, in malignant mesothelioma (MM) and reactive mesothelial cells (RMCs). Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues from 31 MM and 33 RMC samples were analyzed. The expression of YAP1 and TAZ protein were examined by IHC. Positivity for YAP1 was identified 27/31 MM and 15/33 RMC samples. Positivity for TAZ was identified in 28/31 MM and 18/33 RMC samples. Using the optimal cutoff points determined by the receiver operating characteristic curve, a positive IHC result for YAP1 and TAZ was 74% sensitive and 94% specific for detecting MM. The results indicate that increased expression of YAP1 and TAZ may be associated with mesothelial tumorization, and aid in the diagnosis of MM.

Utility of Survivin, BAP1, and Ki-67 immunohistochemistry in distinguishing epithelioid mesothelioma from reactive mesothelial hyperplasia

Histological distinction between epithelioid mesothelioma (EM) and reactive mesothelial hyperplasia (RMH) can be challenging. The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic utility of Survivin, Ki-67, and loss of BRCA1-associated protein 1 (BAP1) expressions in distinguishing EM from RMH using immunohistochemistry. Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded specimens from 78 cases of EM and 80 cases of RMH were immunohistochemically examined for Survivin, BAP1, and Ki-67. In addition, receiver operating characteristic curve analyses were performed to establish the cut-off values for Survivin and Ki-67 labelling indices. Survivin (cut-off value: 5%) had 67.7% sensitivity and 100% specificity, while Ki-67 (cut-off value: 10%) had 85.1% sensitivity and 87.5% specificity, and BAP1 had 66.2% sensitivity and 100% specificity for the differentiation of EM from RMH. Among the combinations of two markers, the combination of Survivin and BAP1 (Survivin-positive and/or BAP1-loss finding) had the highest diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity: 89.8%; specificity: 100%; accuracy: 95.3%). We recommend using the combination of Survivin and BAP1 to distinguish EM from RMH.

The pathological and molecular diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma: a literature review

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM), an asbestos-induced tumor, represents significant diagnostic challenges for pathologists. Its histological diagnosis is stepwise and should be based on morphological assessment, supported by clinical and radiological findings, and supplemented with immunohistochemistry (IHC) and, more recently, molecular tests. The main diagnostic dilemmas are the differential diagnoses with benign mesothelial proliferations and other pleural malignant tumors. The present review is an update regarding the morphological, immunohistochemical, and molecular features with respect to MPM diagnosis. Data sources include a survey of the biomedical literature from PubMed (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed) and textbooks focusing on the pathological diagnosis of MPM and associated immunohistochemical and molecular markers. The histological findings of MPM could facilitate its diagnosis and provide important prognostic information. The immunohistochemical approach should rest on the application of a panel including positive (mesothelial-related) and negative markers with greater than 80% sensitivity and specificity, which need to be selected based on morphology and clinical information. Moreover, in challenging cases, fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) testing for the p16 deletion and IHC to evaluate the loss of BRCA1-associated protein 1 (BAP1) expression could be useful in distinguishing benign from malignant pleural proliferations.

Molecular markers and new diagnostic methods to differentiate malignant from benign mesothelial pleural proliferations: a literature review

Malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is an aggressive tumor associated with asbestos exposure. Histopathological analysis of pleural tissues is the gold standard for diagnosis; however, it can be difficult to differentiate malignant from benign pleural lesions. The purpose of this review is to describe the most important biomarkers and new diagnostic tools suggested for this differential diagnosis. There are many studies concerning the separation between MPM and benign pleural proliferations from both pleural tissues or effusions; most of them are based on the evaluation of one or few biomarkers by immunohistochemistry (IHC) or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), whereas others focused on the identification of MPM signatures given by microRNA (miRNA) or gene expression profiles as well as on the combination of molecular data and classification algorithms. None of the reported biomarkers showed adequate diagnostic accuracy, except for p16 [evaluated by fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH)] and BAP1 (evaluated by IHC), both biomarkers are recommended by the International Mesothelioma Interest Group guidelines for histological and cytological diagnosis. BAP1 and p16 showed a specificity of 100% in discerning malignant from benign lesions because they are exclusively unexpressed or deleted in MPM. However, their sensitivity, even when used together, is not completely sufficient, and absence of their alterations cannot confirm the benign nature of the lesion. Recently, the availability of new techniques and increasing knowledge regarding MPM genetics led to the definition of some molecular panels, including genes or miRNAs specifically deregulated in MPM, that are extremely valuable for differential diagnosis. Moreover, the development of classification algorithms is facilitating the application of molecular data for clinical practice. Data regarding new diagnostic tools and MPM signatures are absolutely promising; however, before their application in clinical practice, a prospective validation is necessary, as these approaches could surely improve the differential diagnosis between malignant and benign pleural lesions.

IMP3 overexpression occurs in various important cancer types and is linked to aggressive tumor features: A tissue microarray study on 8,877 human cancers and normal tissues

IMP3 is an RNA binding protein required for ribosomal RNA processing, which has been suggested to be a prognostic marker in a large variety of human types of cancer. However, available data on the prevalence of IMP3 expression are largely discrepant. To systematically investigate the epidemiology and clinical relevance of IMP3 expression in human cancers we employed a two-step tissue microarrays (TMAs) approach. First, a normal tissue TMA and a multi-tumor TMA were analyzed for immunohistochemically detectable expression of IMP3 in 76 different normal tissue types and 3889 cancer samples from 95 different tumor categories. In a second step, we searched for associations between IMP3 expression and tumor phenotype and patient prognosis in TMAs containing 697 urinary bladder cancers, 1711 colon cancers, 343 esophageal adenocarcinomas, 251 esophageal squamous cell cancers, 673 lung cancers), 275 pancreatic cancers and 230 stomach cancers. In normal tissues, unequivocal IMP3 expression was found in placenta, lymphocytes and some types of glandular epithelial cells. In cancers, at least one case with weak expression could be found in 76 out of 95 (80%) different tumor types and 64 entities (67%) had at least one tumor with strong positivity. IMP3 expression was most frequently found in testicular cancer (including 71% seminomas and 96% non-seminomas), neuroblastoma (88%), and squamous cell cancer of various origins. Significant associations were found between IMP3 and adverse tumor features in esophageal adenocarcinomas and cancers of the urinary bladder, lung, stomach, and pancreas. In summary, IMP3 was frequently expressed in many different tumor types, and was typically associated with aggressive tumor features.

Application of Immunohistochemistry in the Diagnosis of Pulmonary and Pleural Neoplasms

CONTEXT

- A vast majority of neoplasms arising from lung or pleura are initially diagnosed based on the histologic evaluation of small transbronchial, endobronchial, or needle core biopsies. Although most diagnoses can be determined by morphology alone, immunohistochemistry can be a valuable diagnostic tool in the workup of problematic cases.

OBJECTIVE

- To provide a practical approach in the interpretation and immunohistochemical selection of lung/pleura-based neoplasms obtained from small biopsy samples.

DATA SOURCES

- A literature review of previously published articles and the personal experience of the authors were used in this review article.

CONCLUSION

- Immunohistochemistry is a useful diagnostic tool in the workup of small biopsies from the lung and pleura sampled by small biopsy techniques.

BAP1 immunohistochemistry and p16 FISH results in combination provide higher confidence in malignant pleural mesothelioma diagnosis: ROC analysis of the two tests

Differentiation of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) from benign mesothelial proliferation remains problematic. Loss of nuclear staining of BRCA1-associated protein 1 (BAP1; detected using immunohistochemistry (IHC)) and homozygous deletion (HD) of p16 (detected using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH)) are useful for differentiation of MPM from reactive mesothelial hyperplasia (RMH), but the correlation between BAP1 expression loss and p16 HD has not been fully described. We performed BAP1 IHC and p16-specific FISH for 40 MPM and 20 RMH cases, and measured proportions of cells showing BAP1 expression and p16 HD for each case. The diagnostic accuracy for MPM and the cut-off values of the two methods were assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. BAP1 expression loss, p16 HD and coexistence of both were present in 27 (67.5 %), 27 (67.5 %) and 17 (42.5 %) MPM cases, respectively. Three MPM cases (7.5 %) and all 20 RMH cases had neither BAP1 loss nor p16 HD. There was no correlation between the results of the two methods. Their combination showed higher sensitivity (92.5 %, 37/40) and estimated probability than BAP1 IHC and p16-specific FISH used alone. BAP1 IHC and p16-specific FISH have independent diagnostic value, and have increased reliability when used in combination, for MPM diagnosis.

Guidelines for the Cytopathologic Diagnosis of Epithelioid and Mixed-Type Malignant Mesothelioma: a secondary publication

OBJECTIVE

To provide practical guidelines for the cytopathologic diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma.

DATA SOURCES

Cytopathologists with an interest in the field involved in the International Mesothelioma Interest Group (IMIG) and the International Academy of Cytology (IAC) contributed to this update. Reference material includes peer-reviewed publications and textbooks.

RATIONALE

This article is the result of discussions during and after the IMIG 2012 conference in Boston, followed by thorough discussions during the 2013 IAC meeting in Paris. Additional contributions have been obtained from cytopathologists and scientists who could not attend these meetings, with final discussions and input during the IMIG 2014 conference in Cape Town.

Dataset for Reporting of Malignant Mesothelioma of the Pleura or Peritoneum: Recommendations From the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR)

CONTEXT

-The International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting is a not-for-profit organization formed by the Royal Colleges of Pathologists of Australasia and the United Kingdom; the College of American Pathologists; the Canadian Association of Pathologists-Association Canadienne des Pathologists, in association with the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer; and the European Society of Pathology. Its goal is to produce common, internationally agreed upon, evidence-based datasets for use throughout the world.

OBJECTIVE

-To describe a dataset developed by the Expert Panel of the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting for reporting malignant mesothelioma of both the pleura and peritoneum. The dataset is composed of "required" (mandatory) and "recommended" (nonmandatory) elements.

DESIGN

-Based on a review of the most recent evidence and supported by explanatory commentary.

RESULTS

-Eight required elements and 7 recommended elements were agreed upon by the Expert Panel to represent the essential information for reporting malignant mesothelioma of the pleura and peritoneum.

CONCLUSIONS

-In time, the widespread use of an internationally agreed upon, structured, pathology dataset for mesothelioma will lead not only to improved patient management but also provide valuable data for research and international benchmarks.

Guidelines for the cytopathologic diagnosis of epithelioid and mixed-type malignant mesothelioma: Complementary Statement from the International Mesothelioma Interest Group, Also Endorsed by the International Academy of Cytology and the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology

OBJECTIVE

To provide practical guidelines for the cytopathologic diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma.

DATA SOURCES

Cytopathologists with an interest in the field involved in the International Mesothelioma Interest Group (IMIG) and the International Academy of Cytology (IAC) contributed to this update. Reference material includes peer-reviewed publications and textbooks.

RATIONALE

This article is the result of discussions during and after the IMIG 2012 conference in Boston, followed by thorough discussions during the 2013 IAC meeting in Paris. Additional contributions have been obtained from cytopathologists and scientists who could not attend these meetings, with final discussions and input during the IMIG 2014 conference in Cape Town.

Use of Anti-Noxa Antibody for Differential Diagnosis between Epithelioid Mesothelioma and Reactive Mesothelial Hyperplasia

OBJECTIVES

The histological differential diagnosis between epithelioid mesothelioma (EM) and reactive mesothelial hyperplasia (RMH) is not always straightforward. The aim of the present study was to search for new immunohistochemical markers to distinguish EM from RMH.

METHODS

We evaluated and compared the expression of apoptosis-related genes in EM and RMH by real-time RT-PCR array analysis followed by clustering of significant gene expression. Immunohistochemical staining and statistical analysis of Noxa expression in 81 cases of EM and 55 cases of RMH were performed and compared with the utility of other previously reported antibodies such as Desmin, EMA, GLUT-1, IMP-3 and CD146.

RESULTS

Noxa mRNA expression levels were found to be increased in EM when compared to RMH by RT-PCR array analysis. In the immunohistochemical analysis, Noxa showed sensitivity of 69.0%, specificity of 93.6% and positive predictive value of 93.0% as a positive marker of EM in distinguishing it from RMH, and these values were almost similar to IMP-3.

CONCLUSION

Noxa is a marker with relatively high specificity, and can be used to distinguish EM from RMH. It would be a valuable addition to the current antibody panel used for the differential diagnosis of EM and RMH.

Guidelines for cytopathologic diagnosis of epithelioid and mixed type malignant mesothelioma. Complementary statement from the International Mesothelioma Interest Group, also endorsed by the International Academy of Cytology and the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology

To provide practical guidelines for the cytopathologic diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma (MM). Cytopathologists involved in the International Mesothelioma Interest Group (IMIG) and the International Academy of Cytology (IAC), who have an interest in the field contributed to this update. Reference material includes peer-reviewed publications and textbooks. This article is the result of discussions during and after the IMIG 2012 conference in Boston, followed by thorough discussions during the 2013 IAC meeting in Paris. Additional contributions have been obtained from cytopathologists and scientists, who could not attend these meetings, with final discussions and input during the IMIG 2014 conference in cape town. During the previous IMIG biennial meetings, thorough discussions have resulted in published guidelines for the pathologic diagnosis of MM. However, previous recommendations have stated that the diagnosis of MM should be based on histological material only.[12] Accumulating evidence now indicates that the cytological diagnosis of MM supported by ancillary techniques is as reliable as that based on histopathology, although the sensitivity with cytology may be somewhat lower.[345] Recognizing that noninvasive diagnostic modalities benefit both the patient and the health system, future recommendations should include cytology as an accepted method for the diagnosis of this malignancy.[67] The article describes the consensus of opinions of the authors on how cytology together with ancillary testing can be used to establish a reliable diagnosis of MM.

Deletion status of p16 in effusion smear preparation correlates with that of underlying malignant pleural mesothelioma tissue

Differentiating malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) cells morphologically from reactive mesothelial hyperplasia cells is problematic. Homozygous deletion (HD) of p16 (CDKN2A), detected by FISH, is a good marker of malignancy and is useful to differentiate between these cells. However, the correlation between the p16 status of effusion smears and that of the underlying MPM tissues has not been investigated. We used p16‐specific FISH to investigate 20 cases of MPM from which both effusion cytologic smears and histologic specimens were available. In five cases, histologic specimens included both an invasive component and surface mesothelial proliferation. In 14 cases (70%), MPM cells in both tissue sections and effusion smears were p16 HD‐positive. Conversely, MPM cells in the remaining six tumors (30%) were p16 HD‐negative in both tissue sections and effusion smears. For all five MPM cases with surface mesothelial proliferations and invasive components, the effusion smears, surface mesothelial proliferations, and invasive MPM components all displayed p16 deletion. Moreover, the extent to which p16 was deleted in smears highly correlated with the extent of p16 deletion in tissues. The p16 deletion percentages were also similar among smears, tissue surface proliferations, and invasive components. In cases with clinical and radiologic evidence of a diffuse pleural tumor, detection of p16 deletion in cytologic smear samples may permit MPM diagnosis without additional tissue examination. However, the absence of p16 deletion in cytologic smear samples does not preclude MPM.

BAP1 (BRCA1-associated protein 1) is a highly specific marker for differentiating mesothelioma from reactive mesothelial proliferations

The distinction between malignant mesothelioma and reactive mesothelial proliferation can be challenging both on histology and cytology. Recently, variants of the BRCA1-associated protein 1 (BAP1) gene resulting in nuclear protein loss were reported in hereditary and sporadic mesothelioma. Using immunohistochemistry, we evaluated the utility of BAP1 expression in the differential diagnosis between mesothelioma and other mesothelial proliferations on a large series of biopsies that included 212 mesotheliomas, 12 benign mesothelial tumors, and 42 reactive mesothelial proliferations. BAP1 stain was also performed in 70 cytological samples (45 mesotheliomas and 25 reactive mesothelial proliferations). BAP1 was expressed in all benign mesothelial tumors, whereas 139/212 (66%) mesotheliomas were BAP1 negative, especially in epithelioid/biphasic compared with sarcomatoid/desmoplastic subtypes (69% vs 15%). BAP1 loss was homogeneous in neoplastic cells except for two epithelioid mesotheliomas showing tumor heterogeneity. By fluorescence in situ hybridization, BAP1 protein loss was paralleled by homozygous deletion of the BAP1 locus in the vast majority of BAP1-negative tumors (31/41, 76%), whereas 9/10 BAP1-positive mesotheliomas were normal. In biopsies interpreted as reactive mesothelial proliferation BAP1 loss was 100% predictive of malignancy, as all 6 cases subsequently developed BAP1-negative mesothelioma, whereas only 3/36 (8%) BAP1-positive cases progressed to mesothelioma. On cytology/cell blocks, benign mesothelial cells were invariably positive for BAP1, whereas 64% of mesotheliomas showed loss of protein; all 6 cases showing BAP1 negativity were associated with histological diagnosis of BAP1-negative mesothelioma. BAP1 stain also showed utility in the differential of mesothelioma from most common pleural and peritoneal mimickers, such as lung and ovary carcinomas, with specificity and sensitivity of 99/70% and 100/70%, respectively. Our results show that BAP1 protein is frequently lost in mesothelioma, especially of epithelioid/biphasic subtype and is commonly associated with homozygous BAP1 deletion. BAP1 immunostain represents an excellent biomarker with an unprecedented specificity (100%) in the distinction between benign and malignant mesothelial proliferations. Finding BAP1 loss in mesothelial cells should prompt to immediately reevaluate the patient; moreover, it might be useful in mapping tumor extent and planning surgical resection.

Guidelines for the cytopathologic diagnosis of epithelioid and mixed-type malignant mesothelioma. Complementary statement from the International Mesothelioma Interest Group, also endorsed by the International Academy of Cytology and the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology

OBJECTIVE

To provide practical guidelines for the cytopathologic diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma.

DATA SOURCES

Cytopathologists with an interest in the field involved in the International Mesothelioma Interest Group (IMIG) and the International Academy of Cytology (IAC) contributed to this update. Reference material includes peer-reviewed publications and textbooks.

RATIONALE

This article is the result of discussions during and after the IMIG 2012 conference in Boston, followed by thorough discussions during the 2013 IAC meeting in Paris. Additional contributions have been obtained from cytopathologists and scientists who could not attend these meetings, with final discussions and input during the IMIG 2014 conference in Cape Town.

Practical utility of insulin-like growth factor II mRNA-binding protein 3, glucose transporter 1, and epithelial membrane antigen for distinguishing malignant mesotheliomas from benign mesothelial proliferations

The differentiation of malignant mesotheliomas and benign mesothelial proliferations is crucial in determining patient care and prognosis. But, this distinction can be extremely difficult, particularly in small biopsies. Recently, insulin-like growth factor II mRNA-binding protein 3 (IMP3) and glucose transporter 1 (GLUT-1) have been reported as specific and sensitive markers in the distinction of mesotheliomas from benign mesothelial proliferations. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the utility of IMP3, GLUT-1, and epithelial membrane antigen (EMA) immunohistochemistry for distinguishing mesotheliomas from benign mesothelial proliferations. Immunoexpression of IMP3, GLUT-1, and EMA was evaluated in 88 malignant mesotheliomas, 35 adenomatoid tumors, and 20 benign lung tissues with reactive mesothelial cells. The sensitivity for IMP3, GLUT-1, and EMA was 37%, 21%, and 41%, respectively. The specificity for IMP3, GLUT-1, and EMA was 100%. When IMP3, GLUT1, and EMA combined, the sensitivity was 66% for IMP3/EMA staining, 53% for GLUT-1/EMA staining, and 45% for IMP3/GLUT-1. Use of IMP3 and EMA together is more helpful to distinguish malignant mesotheliomas from benign mesothelial proliferations than the use of IMP3 or EMA alone.