Mesothelial tumors are classified into benign or preinvasive tumors, and mesotheliomas. The benign or preinvasive group includes adenomatoid tumors, well-differentiated papillary mesothelial tumors, ...and mesothelioma in situ. Malignant tumors are mesotheliomas and can be localized or diffuse. Histological classification of invasive mesotheliomas into three major subtypes—epithelioid, sarcomatoid, and biphasic is prognostically important. It also plays a significant role in the treatment decisions of patients diagnosed with this deadly disease. Grading and subtyping of epithelioid mesotheliomas have been one of the major changes in the recent WHO classification of pleural tumors. Mesothelioma in situ has emerged as a precisely defined clinico-pathologic entity that for diagnosis requires demonstration of loss of BAP1 or MTAP by immunohistochemistry, or CDKN2A homozygous deletion by FISH. The use of these two biomarkers improves the diagnostic sensitivity of effusion specimens and limited tissue samples and is valuable in establishing the diagnosis of epithelioid mesothelioma. In this review, recent changes in the histologic classification of pleural mesothelioma, importance of ancillary diagnostic studies, and molecular characteristics of mesotheliomas are discussed.
Ancillary studies facilitate accurate diagnosis of morphologically challenging mesothelial proliferations. The current diagnostic algorithm proceeds from BAP1 immunohistochemistry to CDKN2A ...fluorescence in situ hybridization. While MTAP immunohistochemistry has recently shown promise as a surrogate for CDKN2A fluorescence in situ hybridization, it has been examined in only a few single-institution studies. Furthermore, there are no published reports on interobserver agreement or interlaboratory reproducibility for MTAP immunohistochemistry. We performed MTAP immunohistochemistry on 20 benign mesothelial lesions and 99 malignant mesotheliomas from five mesothelioma centers in four countries, and each MTAP stain was independently interpreted by four pathologists. CDKN2A fluorescence in situ hybridization data were available for a subset of cases, and a subset of cases was subjected in MTAP immunohistochemistry in multiple laboratories to assess interlaboratory reproducibility. Interobserver agreement in MTAP immunostain interpretation was excellent for all mesothelial lesions (kappa: 0.85) and for malignant mesothelioma cases only (kappa: 0.82). Interlaboratory reproducibility was also excellent (kappa values for paired protocols: 0.77-0.89). MTAP loss by immunohistochemistry was 78% sensitive and 96% specific for CDKN2A homozygous deletion. MTAP immunohistochemistry is a reliable surrogate for CDKN2A fluorescence in situ hybridization in diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma. Interobserver agreement is excellent for interpretation of MTAP staining, and protocols performed in different laboratories yield concordant MTAP staining results. Rare cases with immunohistochemical MTAP loss may retain normal CDKN2A copy number, and the MTAP staining results should be correlated with clinicopathologic findings and other ancillary studies.
Pleural mesothelioma classification update Beasley, Mary Beth; Galateau-Salle, Francoise; Dacic, Sanja
Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology,
2021/1, Letnik:
478, Številka:
1
Journal Article
Recenzirano
The 2015 WHO classification of pleural mesotheliomas includes three major histologic subtypes—epithelioid, sarcomatoid, and biphasic. Recent genomic data has supported the need for a more granular ...and clinically valid classification beyond the three current subtypes. Because of tumor rarity and overlapping histologic features with other tumor types, diagnostic immunohistochemical work up is essential component in establishing the final diagnosis of mesothelioma. The use of BAP1 and
CDKN2A
/MTAP improves the diagnostic sensitivity of effusion specimens and are valuable in establishing the diagnosis of epithelioid mesothelioma. The major change in the forthcoming WHO classification is the inclusion of mesothelioma in situ as a diagnostic category. In this review, we discuss recently proposed changes in the histologic classification of pleural mesothelioma, differential diagnosis, and importance of ancillary diagnostic studies.
The existence of an in situ phase of malignant mesothelioma has long been postulated but until recently has been impossible to prove. Here we describe ten patients with mesothelioma in situ, defined ...by a single layer of surface mesothelial cells showing loss of BAP1 nuclear immunostaining, no evidence of tumor by imaging and/or by direct examination of the pleura/peritoneum, and no invasive mesothelioma developing for at least 1 year. Nine cases were pleural and one peritoneal. Most patients were biopsied for repeated effusions of unknown etiology; in two patients mesothelioma in situ was found incidentally in lung cancer resections. In addition to surface mesothelium with BAP1 loss, one case had a surface papillary proliferation with BAP1 loss, and two cases had a small (few millimeter) nodule with BAP1 loss. CDKN2A was deleted by FISH in one of eight cases. Methylthioadenosine phosphorylase showed partial loss in the surface mesothelium by immunohistochemistry in three cases. Invasive malignant mesothelioma developed in seven patients with time between biopsy and invasive disease from 12 to 92 (median 60) months. Invasive mesothelioma has not developed in the other three patients at 12, 57, and 120 months, but the latter patient, who has pleural plaques, still has repeated pleural effusions, probably representing a so-called "benign asbestos effusion." We conclude that mesothelioma in situ, as diagnosed using the criteria outlined above, is associated with a high risk of developing invasive mesothelioma, but typically over a relatively protracted time, so that curable interventions maybe possible.
The 2021 WHO Classification of Thoracic Tumours was published earlier this year, with classification of lung tumors being one of the chapters. The principles remain those of using morphology first, ...supported by immunohistochemistry, and then molecular techniques. In 2015, there was particular emphasis on using immunohistochemistry to make classification more accurate. In 2021, there is greater emphasis throughout the book on advances in molecular pathology across all tumor types. Major features within this edition are (1) broader emphasis on genetic testing than in the 2015 WHO Classification; (2) a section entirely dedicated to the classification of small diagnostic samples; (3) continued recommendation to document percentages of histologic patterns in invasive nonmucinous adenocarcinomas, with utilization of these features to apply a formal grading system, and using only invasive size for T-factor size determination in part lepidic nonmucinous lung adenocarcinomas as recommended by the eighth edition TNM classification; (4) recognition of spread through airspaces as a histologic feature with prognostic significance; (5) moving lymphoepithelial carcinoma to squamous cell carcinomas; (6) update on evolving concepts in lung neuroendocrine neoplasm classification; (7) recognition of bronchiolar adenoma/ciliated muconodular papillary tumor as a new entity within the adenoma subgroup; (8) recognition of thoracic SMARCA4-deficient undifferentiated tumor; and (9) inclusion of essential and desirable diagnostic criteria for each tumor.
The Blueprint (BP) Programmed Death Ligand 1 (PD-L1) Immunohistochemistry Comparability Project is a pivotal academic/professional society and industrial collaboration to assess the feasibility of ...harmonizing the clinical use of five independently developed commercial PD-L1 immunohistochemistry assays. The goal of BP phase 2 (BP2) was to validate the results obtained in BP phase 1 by using real-world clinical lung cancer samples.
BP2 were conducted using 81 lung cancer specimens of various histological and sample types, stained with all five trial-validated PD-L1 assays (22C3, 28-8, SP142, SP263, and 73-10); the slides were evaluated by an international panel of pathologists. BP2 also assessed the reliability of PD-L1 scoring by using digital images, and samples prepared for cytological examination. PD-L1 expression was assessed for percentage (tumor proportional score) of tumor cell (TC) and immune cell areas showing PD-L1 staining, with TCs scored continuously or categorically with the cutoffs used in checkpoint inhibitor trials.
The BP2 results showed highly comparable staining by the 22C3, 28-8 and SP263 assays; less sensitivity with the SP142 assay; and higher sensitivity with the 73-10 assay to detect PD-L1 expression on TCs. Glass slide and digital image scorings were highly concordant (Pearson correlation >0.96). There was very strong reliability among pathologists in TC PD-L1 scoring with all assays (overall intraclass correlation coefficient ICC = 0.86–0.93), poor reliability in IC PD-L1 scoring (overall ICC = 0.18–0.19), and good agreement in assessing PD-L1 status on cytological cell block materials (ICC = 0.78–0.85).
BP2 consolidates the analytical evidence for interchangeability of the 22C3, 28-8, and SP263 assays and lower sensitivity of the SP142 assay for determining tumor proportion score on TCs and demonstrates greater sensitivity of the 73-10 assay compared with that of the other assays.
Challenges in lung and thoracic pathology Dacic, Sanja; Ströbel, Philipp
Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology,
2021/1, Letnik:
478, Številka:
1
Journal Article
- Malignant mesothelioma (MM) is an uncommon tumor that can be difficult to diagnose.
- To provide updated, practical guidelines for the pathologic diagnosis of MM.
- Pathologists involved in the ...International Mesothelioma Interest Group and others with an interest and expertise in the field contributed to this update. Reference material included up-to-date, peer-reviewed publications and textbooks.
- There was discussion and consensus opinion regarding guidelines for (1) distinguishing benign from malignant mesothelial proliferations (both epithelioid and spindle cell lesions), (2) cytologic diagnosis of MM, (3) recognition of the key histologic features of pleural and peritoneal MM, (4) use of histochemical and immunohistochemical stains in the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of MM, (5) differentiating epithelioid MM from various carcinomas (lung, breast, ovarian, and colonic adenocarcinomas, and squamous cell and renal cell carcinomas), (6) diagnosis of sarcomatoid MM, (7) use of molecular markers in the diagnosis of MM, (8) electron microscopy in the diagnosis of MM, and (9) some caveats and pitfalls in the diagnosis of MM. Immunohistochemical panels are integral to the diagnosis of MM, but the exact makeup of panels employed is dependent on the differential diagnosis and on the antibodies available in a given laboratory. Depending on the morphology, immunohistochemical panels should contain both positive and negative markers for mesothelial differentiation and for lesions considered in the differential diagnosis. Immunohistochemical markers should have either sensitivity or specificity greater than 80% for the lesions in question. Interpretation of positivity generally should take into account the localization of the stain (eg, nuclear versus cytoplasmic) and the percentage of cells staining (>10% is suggested for cytoplasmic and membranous markers). Selected molecular markers are now being used to distinguish benign from malignant mesothelial proliferations. These guidelines are meant to be a practical diagnostic reference for the pathologist; however, some new pathologic predictors of prognosis and response to therapy are also included.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, OILJ, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VSZLJ
To establish evidence-based recommendations for the molecular analysis of lung cancers that are that are required to guide EGFR- and ALK-directed therapies, addressing which patients and samples ...should be tested, and when and how testing should be performed.
Three cochairs without conflicts of interest were selected, one from each of the 3 sponsoring professional societies: College of American Pathologists, International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer, and Association for Molecular Pathology. Writing and advisory panels were constituted from additional experts from these societies.
Three unbiased literature searches of electronic databases were performed to capture articles published published from January 2004 through February 2012, yielding 1533 articles whose abstracts were screened to identify 521 pertinent articles that were then reviewed in detail for their relevance to the recommendations. Evidence was formally graded for each recommendation.
Initial recommendations were formulated by the cochairs and panel members at a public meeting. Each guideline section was assigned to at least 2 panelists. Drafts were circulated to the writing panel (version 1), advisory panel (version 2), and the public (version 3) before submission (version 4).
The 37 guideline items address 14 subjects, including 15 recommendations (evidence grade A/B). The major recommendations are to use testing for EGFR mutations and ALK fusions to guide patient selection for therapy with an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) or anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibitor, respectively, in all patients with advanced-stage adenocarcinoma, regardless of sex, race, smoking history, or other clinical risk factors, and to prioritize EGFR and ALK testing over other molecular predictive tests. As scientific discoveries and clinical practice outpace the completion of randomized clinical trials, evidence-based guidelines developed by expert practitioners are vital for communicating emerging clinical standards. Already, new treatments targeting genetic alterations in other, less common driver oncogenes are being evaluated in lung cancer, and testing for these may be addressed in future versions of these guidelines.
This overview of the fifth edition of the WHO classification of thymic epithelial tumors (including thymomas, thymic carcinomas, and thymic neuroendocrine tumors NETs), mediastinal germ cell tumors, ...and mesenchymal neoplasms aims to (1) list established and new tumor entities and subtypes and (2) focus on diagnostic, molecular, and conceptual advances since publication of the fourth edition in 2015. Diagnostic advances are best exemplified by the immunohistochemical characterization of adenocarcinomas and the recognition of genetic translocations in metaplastic thymomas, rare B2 and B3 thymomas, and hyalinizing clear cell carcinomas. Advancements at the molecular and tumor biological levels of utmost oncological relevance are the findings that thymomas and most thymic carcinomas lack currently targetable mutations, have an extraordinarily low tumor mutational burden, but typically have a programmed death-ligand 1high phenotype. Finally, data underpinning a conceptual advance are illustrated for the future classification of thymic NETs that may fit into the classification scheme of extrathoracic NETs. Endowed with updated clinical information and state-of-the-art positron emission tomography and computed tomography images, the fifth edition of the WHO classification of thymic epithelial tumors, germ cell tumors, and mesenchymal neoplasms with its wealth of new diagnostic and molecular insights will be a valuable source for pathologists, radiologists, surgeons, and oncologists alike. Therapeutic perspectives and research challenges will be addressed as well.
PDF
