Abstract
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.
References
1.
Husain AN, Colby TV, et al: Guidelines for pathologic diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma: a consensus statement from the International Mesothelioma Interest Group. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2009;133:1317-1331.
2.
Husain AN, Colby T, et al: Guidelines for pathologic diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma: 2012 update of the consensus statement from the International Mesothelioma Interest Group. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2013;137:647-667.
3.
Rakha EA, Patil S, et al: The sensitivity of cytologic evaluation of pleural fluid in the diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma. Diagn Cytopathol 2010;38:874-879.
4.
Paintal A, Raparia K, et al: The diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma in effusion cytology: a reappraisal and results of a multi-institution survey. Cancer Cytopathol 2013;121:703-707.
5.
Segal A, Sterrett GF, et al: A diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma can be made by effusion cytology: results of a 20 year audit. Pathology 2013;45:44-48.
6.
Sheaff M: Should cytology be an acceptable means of diagnosing malignant mesothelioma? Cytopathology 2011;22:3-4.
7.
Henderson DW, Reid G, et al: Challenges and controversies in the diagnosis of mesothelioma. Part 1. Cytology-only diagnosis, biopsies, immunohistochemistry, discrimination between mesothelioma and reactive mesothelial hyperplasia, and biomarkers. J Clin Pathol 2013;66:847-853.
8.
Whitaker D: The cytology of malignant mesothelioma. Cytopathology 2000;11:139-151.
9.
Bedrossian CWM: Malignant Effusions: A Multimodal Approach to Cytologic Diagnosis. New York, Igaku Shoin, 1994.
10.
Tao L: Cytopathology of Malignant Effusions. Chicago, ASCP Press, 1996.
11.
Davidson B, Firat P, et al (eds): Serous Effusions: Etiology, Diagnosis, Prognosis, and Therapy. London/New York, Springer, 2012.
12.
Michael CW, Chhieng D, Bedrossian CWM (eds): Cytohistology of the Serous Membranes. New York, Cambridge University Press, 2015.
13.
Zellos LS, Sugarbaker DJ: Multimodality treatment of diffuse malignant pleural mesothelioma. Semin Oncol 2002;29:41-50.
14.
Ismail-Khan R, Robinson LA, et al: Malignant pleural mesothelioma: a comprehensive review. Cancer Control 2006;13:255-263.
15.
Michael CW, Bedrossian CC: The implementation of liquid-based cytology for lung and pleural-based diseases. Acta Cytol 2014;58:563-573.
16.
Widehn S, Kindblom LG: A rapid and simple method for electron microscopy of paraffin-embedded tissue. Ultrastruct Pathol 1988;12:131-136.
17.
Kwee WS, Veldhuizen RW, et al: Quantitative and qualitative differences between benign and malignant mesothelial cells in pleural fluid. Acta Cytol 1982;26:401-406.
18.
Matsumoto S, Nabeshima K, et al: Morphology of 9p21 homozygous deletion-positive pleural mesothelioma cells analyzed using fluorescence in situ hybridization and virtual microscope system in effusion cytology. Cancer Cytopathol 2013;121:415-422.
19.
Kho-Duffin J, Tao LC, et al: Cytologic diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma, with particular emphasis on the epithelial noncohesive cell type. Diagn Cytopathol 1999;20:57-62.
20.
Boon ME, van Velzen D, et al: Analysis of number, size and distribution patterns of lipid vacuoles in benign and malignant mesothelial cells. Anal Quant Cytol 1984;6:221-226.
21.
Boon ME, Veldhuizen RW, et al: Qualitative distinctive differences between the vacuoles of mesothelioma cells and of cells from metastatic carcinoma exfoliated in pleural fluid. Acta Cytol 1984;28:443-449.
22.
Leong AS, Parkinson R, et al: ‘Thick' cell membranes revealed by immunocytochemical staining: a clue to the diagnosis of mesothelioma. Diagn Cytopathol 1990;6:9-13.
23.
Ordonez NG, Sahin AA: Diagnostic utility of immunohistochemistry in distinguishing between epithelioid pleural mesotheliomas and breast carcinomas: a comparative study. Hum Pathol 2014;45:1529-1540.
24.
Dejmek A, Hjerpe A: Carcinoembryonic antigen-like reactivity in malignant mesothelioma: a comparison between different commercially available antibodies. Cancer 1994;73:464-469.
25.
Dejmek A, Hjerpe A: Reactivity of six antibodies in effusions of mesothelioma, adenocarcinoma and mesotheliosis: stepwise logistic regression analysis. Cytopathology 2000;11:8-17.
26.
Saad RS, Cho P, et al: The value of epithelial membrane antigen expression in separating benign mesothelial proliferation from malignant mesothelioma: a comparative study. Diagn Cytopathol 2005;32:156-159.
27.
Sato A, Torii I, et al: Immunocytochemistry of CD146 is useful to discriminate between malignant pleural mesothelioma and reactive mesothelium. Mod Pathol 2010;23:1458-1466.
28.
Husain AN, Mirza MK, et al: How useful is GLUT-1 in differentiating mesothelial hyperplasia and fibrosing pleuritis from epithelioid and sarcomatoid mesotheliomas? An international collaborative study. Lung Cancer 2014;83:324-328.
29.
Minato H, Kurose N, et al: Comparative immunohistochemical analysis of IMP3, GLUT1, EMA, CD146, and desmin for distinguishing malignant mesothelioma from reactive mesothelial cells. Am J Clin Pathol 2014;141:85-93.
30.
Hasteh F, Lin GY, et al: The use of immunohistochemistry to distinguish reactive mesothelial cells from malignant mesothelioma in cytologic effusions. Cancer Cytopathol 2010;118:90-96.
31.
Churg A, Allen T, et al: Well-differentiated papillary mesothelioma with invasive foci. Am J Surg Pathol 2014;38:990-998.
32.
Washimi K, Yokose T, et al: Well-differentiated papillary mesothelioma, possibly giving rise to diffuse malignant mesothelioma: a case report. Pathol Int 2013;63:220-225.
33.
Davidson B: The diagnostic and molecular characteristics of malignant mesothelioma and ovarian/peritoneal serous carcinoma. Cytopathology 2011;22:5-21.
34.
Baker PM, Clement PB, et al: Malignant peritoneal mesothelioma in women: a study of 75 cases with emphasis on their morphologic spectrum and differential diagnosis. Am J Clin Pathol 2005;123:724-737.
35.
Robinson BW, Creaney J, et al: Mesothelin-family proteins and diagnosis of mesothelioma. Lancet 2003;362:1612-1616.
36.
Creaney J, Yeoman D, et al: Soluble mesothelin in effusions: a useful tool for the diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma. Thorax 2007;62:569-576.
37.
Pass HI, Wali A, et al: Soluble mesothelin-related peptide level elevation in mesothelioma serum and pleural effusions. Ann Thorac Surg 2008;85:265-272.
38.
Creaney J, Dick IM, et al: Pleural effusion hyaluronic acid as a prognostic marker in pleural malignant mesothelioma. Lung Cancer 2013;82:491-498.
39.
Fujimoto N, Gemba K, et al: Hyaluronic acid in the pleural fluid of patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. Respir Investig 2013;51:92-97.
40.
Mundt F, Nilsonne G, et al: Hyaluronan and N-ERC/mesothelin as key biomarkers in a specific two-step model to predict pleural malignant mesothelioma. PLoS One 2013;8:e72030.
41.
Benjamin H, Lebanony, et al: A diagnostic assay based on microRNA expression accurately identifies malignant pleural mesothelioma. J Mol Diagn 2010;12:771-779.
42.
Bovin N, Obukhova P, et al: Repertoire of human natural anti-glycan immunoglobulins. Do we have auto-antibodies? Biochim Biophys Acta 2012;1820:1373-1382.
43.
Pass HI, Levin SM, et al: Fibulin-3 as a blood and effusion biomarker for pleural mesothelioma. N Engl J Med 2012;367:1417-1427.
44.
Nurminen M, Dejmek A, et al: Clinical utility of liquid-chromatographic analysis of effusions for hyaluronate content. Clin Chem 1994;40:777-780.
45.
Wan C, Shen YC, et al: Diagnostic value of fluorescence in situ hybridization assay in malignant mesothelioma: a meta-analysis. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2012;13:4745-4749.
46.
Adell E, Dejmek A: Telomerase activity analyzed with trap in situ provides additional information in effusions remaining equivocal after immunocytochemistry and hyaluronan analysis. Diagn Cytopathol 2014;42:1051-1057.
47.
Zendehrokh N, Dejmek A: Telomere repeat amplification protocol (TRAP) in situ reveals telomerase activity in three cell types in effusions: malignant cells, proliferative mesothelial cells, and lymphocytes. Mod Pathol 2005;18:189-196.
48.
Flores-Staino C, Darai-Ramqvist E, et al: Adaptation of a commercial fluorescent in situ hybridization test to the diagnosis of malignant cells in effusions. Lung Cancer 2010;68:39-43.
49.
Pinelli V, Laroumagne S, et al: Pleural fluid cytological yield and visceral pleural invasion in patients with epithelioid malignant pleural mesothelioma. J Thorac Oncol 2012;7:595-598.
© 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel
2015
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.