Pleural Mesothelioma: Current Practice and Approach.
Journal
Advances in anatomic pathology
ISSN: 1533-4031
Titre abrégé: Adv Anat Pathol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9435676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Jul 2023
01 Jul 2023
Historique:
medline:
9
6
2023
pubmed:
24
1
2023
entrez:
23
1
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Pleural mesotheliomas represent one of the most common diagnostic challenges in thoracic pathology. The diagnosis of pleural mesothelioma weighs heavily on clinical and radiologic information. In addition, in the past, before the era of immunohistochemistry, the diagnosis was aided with the use of special histochemical stains-PAS, D-PAS, and mucicarmine, which now very much have been replaced by immunohistochemical stains. In the era of immunohistochemistry, a combination of carcinomatous epitopes and positive mesothelioma markers has become paramount in the diagnosis of mesothelioma, and more recently the use of molecular techniques has become another ancillary tool in supporting such a diagnosis. At the same time, the treatment and clinical outcome of these patients may in some measure be determined by the histopathological features of the tumor and one that also over the years has changed from a palliative type to surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or a combination of these types. The histopathological growth patterns of mesothelioma are also wide, and in some cases may mimic other tumors that may be primary or metastatic to the pleura. Therefore, the assessment of the diagnosis of mesothelioma is one that requires a global view of the different factors including clinical, radiologic, pathologic-including immunohistochemistry and molecular diagnosis.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36689647
doi: 10.1097/PAP.0000000000000390
pii: 00125480-202307000-00002
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers, Tumor
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
243-252Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have no funding or conflicts of interest to disclose.
Références
Klemperer P, Rabin CB. Primary neoplasms of the pleura: a report of five cases. Arch Path. 1931;11:385–412.
Dardick I, Jabi M, McCaughey WTE, et al. Diffuse epithelial mesothelioma: a review of the ultrastructural spectrum. Ultrastructural Pathol. 1987;11:503–533.
Oury TD, Hammar SP, Roggli VL. Ultrastructural features of diffuse malignant mesotheliomas. Hum Pathol. 1998;29:1382–1392.
Suster S, Moran CA. Applications and limitations of immunohistochemistry in the diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma. Adv Anat Pathol. 2006;13:316–329.
Suster S, Moran CA. Malignant mesothelioma: current status of histopathologic diagnosis and molecular profile. Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 2005;5:715–723.
Flores RM, Zakowski M, Venkatraman E, et al. Prognostic factors in the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma at a large tertiary referral center. J Thorac Oncol. 2007;2:957–965.
Colaut F, Toniolo L, Vicario G, et al. Pleurectomy/decortication plus chemotherapy: outcomes of 40 cases of malignant pleural mesothelioma. Chir Ital. 2004;56:781–786.
Arrossi AV, Lin E, Rice D, et al. Histologic assessment and prognostic factors of malignant pleural mesothelioma treated with extrapleural pneumonectomy. Am J Clin Pathol. 2008;130:754–764.
Godwin MC. Diffuse mesotheliomas: with comment on their relationship to localized fibrous mesothelioma. Cancer. 1957;10:298–319.
Wagner JC, Sleggs CA, Marchard P. Diffuse pleural mesothelioma and asbestos exposure in the north western cape province. Brit J Industr Med. 1960;17:260–271.
Selikoff IJ, Churg J. Biological effects of asbestos. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1965;132:603–613.
Mann RH, Grosh JL, O’Donnell WM. Mesothelioma associated with asbestos: report of 3 cases. Cancer. 1966;19:521–526.
Enterline PE, Henderson VL. Geographic patterns for pleural mesothelioma deaths in the Unites States, 1968-1981. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1987;79:31–37.
Teja MJ, Mink PJ, Lau E, et al. US mesothelioma patterns 1973-2002: indicators of change and insights into background rates. Eur J Cancer Prev. 2008;17:525.
Price B. Analysis of current trends in Unites States mesothelioma incidence. Am J Epidemiol. 1997;145:211.
Robinson BM. Malignant pleural mesothelioma: an epidemiological perspective. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2012;1:491.
Mann S, Khawar S, Moran CA, et al. Revisiting localized malignant mesothelioma. Ann Diagn Pathol. 2019;39:74–77.
Henderson DW, Shilkin KB, Whitaker D. Reactive mesothelial hyperplasia vs mesothelioma, including mesothelioma in situ. Am J Clin Pathol. 1998;110:397–404.
Churg A, Hwang H, Tan L, et al. Malignant mesothelioma in situ. Histopathology. 2018;72:1-1033–1038.
Churg A, Galateau-Salle F, Roden AC, et al. Malignant mesothelioma in situ: morphologic features and clinical outcome. Mod Pathol. 2020;33:297–302.
Oramas DM, Zaleski M, Moran CA. Sarcomatoid mesothelioma: a clinicopathological and immunohistochemical study of 64 cases. Int J Surg Pathol. 2021;29:820–825.
Moran CA, Wick MR, Suster S. The role of immunohistochemistry in the diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma. Sem Diag Pathol. 2000;17:178–183.
Bedrossian CWM, Bonsib S, Moran CA. Differential diagnosis between mesothelioma and adenocarcinoma: a multimodal approach based on ultrastructure and immunohistochemistry. Sem Diag Pathol. 1992;9:124–140.
Mayall FG, Jasani B, Gibbs AR. Immunohistochemical positivity for neuron-specific enolase and LEU-7 in malignant mesotheliomas. J Pathol. 1991;165:325–328.
Ordonez NG. Value of the MOC-31 monoclonal antibody in differentiating epithelial pleural mesothelioma from lung adenocarcinoma. Hum Pathol. 1998;29:166–169.
Gaffey MJ, Mills SE, Swanson PE, et al. Immunoreactivity for BER-EP4 in adenocarcinomas, adenomatoid tumors, and malignant mesothelioma. Am J Surg Pathol. 1992;16:593–599.
Garcia-Pratts MD, Ballestin C, Sotelo T, et al. A comparative evaluation of immunohistochemical markers for the differential diagnosis of malignant pleural tumors. Histopathology. 1998;32:462–472.
Wolanski KD, Whitaker D, Shilkin KB, et al. The use of epithelial membrane antigen and silver stained nucleolar organizer regions testing in the differential diagnosis of mesothelioma from benign reactive mesotheliosis. Cancer. 1998;82:583–590.
Sheibani K, Shin SS, Kezirian J, et al. Ber-EP4 antibody as a discriminant in the differential diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma versus adenocarcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 1991;15:779–784.
Moll R, Dhouailly D, Sun TT. Expression of keratin 5 as a distinctive feature of epithelial and biphasic mesotheliomas: an immunohistochemical study using monoclonal antibody AE14. Virch Arch B Cell Pathol. 1989;58:129–145.
Ordonez NG. In search of a positive immunohistochemical marker for mesothelioma: an update. Adv Anat Pathol. 1998;5:53–60.
Ordonez NG. Value of calretinin immunostaining in differentiating epithelial mesothelioma from lung adenocarcinoma. Mod Pathol. 1998;11:929–933.
Ordonez NG. The immunohistochemical diagnosis of epithelial mesothelioma. Hum Pathol . 1999;30:313–323.
Oates J, Edwards C. HBME, MOC-31, WT1, and calretinin: an assessment of recently described markers for mesothelioma and adenocarcinoma. Histopathology. 2000;36:341–347.
Shiomi K, Hagiwara Y, Sonoue K, et al. Sensitive and specific new enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for N-ERC/mesothelin increases its potential as a useful serum tumor marker for mesothelioma. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14:1431–1437.
Sewaga T, Hagiwara Y, Ishikawa K, et al. Mesomark kit detects C-ERC/mesothelin, but not SMRP with C-terminus. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2008;369:915–918.
Berg KB, Churg A. GATA3 immunohistochemistry for distinguishing sarcomatoid and desmoplastic mesothelioma from sarcomatoid carcinoma of the lung. Am J Surg Pathol. 2017;41:1221–1225.
Terra SB, Roden AC, Aubry MC, et al. Utility of immunohistochemistry for MUC4 and GATA3 to aid in the distinction of pleural sarcomatoid mesothelioma from pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinoma. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2021;145:208–213.
Prabhakaran S, Hocking A, Kim C, et al. The potential utility of GATA binding protein 3 for diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma. Hum Pathol. 2020;105:1–8.
Zaleski M, Kalhor N, Fujimoto H, et al. Sarcomatoid mesothelioma: a CDKN2A molecular analysis of 53 cases with immunohistochemical correlation with BAP1. Path Res Pract. 2020;216:153267.
Wu D, Hiroshima K, Yusa T, et al. Usefulness of p16/CDKN2A fluorescence in situ hybridization and BAP1 immunohistochemistry for the diagnosis of biphasic mesothelioma. Ann Diagn Pathol. 2017;26:31–37.
Hwang HC, Pyott S, Rodriguez S, et al. BAP1 immunohistochemistry and p16 FISH in the diagnosis of sarcomatous and desmoplastic mesotheliomas. Am J Surg Pathol. 2016;40:714–718.
Sugarbaker DJ, Garcia JP, Richards WG, et al. Extrapleural pneumonectomy in the multimodality therapy of malignant pleural mesothelioma. Results of 120 consecutive patients. Ann Surg. 1996;224:288–296.
Curran D, Sahmoud T, Therase P, et al. Prognostic factors in patients with pleural mesothelioma: the European organization for research and treatment of cancer experience. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:145–152.
Rusch VW, Venkatraman ES. Important prognostic factors in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma, managed surgically. Ann Thorac Surg. 1999;68:1799–1804.
Sugarbaker DJ, Flores RM, Jaklitsch MT, et al. Resection margins, extrapleural nodal status, and cell type determine postoperative long-term survival in trimodality therapy of malignant plural mesothelioma: results in 183 patients. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1999;117:54–65.