Distinction between epithelioid mesothelioma and adenocarcinoma has been, and re- mains, the subject of numerous publications dating back over several decades. The current approach, using histochemistry and immunohistochemical panels, facilitates the diagnosis in the vast majority of cases, although there is a subset of difficult cases, in which ultrastructural assessment may still be required.
Controversy remains as to which immunohistochemical markers are of greatest value although there is general acceptance that distinction between mesothelioma and adenocarcinoma requires the use of a panel of antibodies rather than reliance on a single immunohistochemical result. The component antibodies included in these panels are undergoing change, with the recent commercial availability of several novel antibodies positive in mesothelioma.
Effusion cytology
Approximately 60% of mesotheliomas can be diagnosed on morphological grounds in effusion specimens; 20% require additional ancillary studies (immunohistochemistryor EM) and 20% are undiagnosable by cytology, either due to inadequacy of the sample or the poorly differentiated nature of the tumour. We advocate the routine use of ancillary immunohistochemical studies in all cases.
Histology
Distinguishing between mesothelioma and adenocarcinoma in biopsy specimens presents similar problems to those encountered in cytological specimens. Often, the morphological clues present in a cytology specimen are not as easily recognised in biopsy material, particularly in small or distorted samples. The diagnostic sensitivity of a small biopsy is less than that of an effusion specimen, as the latter reflects cell shedding from a total serosal surface bathed in fluid. Classical features of well differentiated epithelial mesothelioma in biopsy material include tubulo-papillary or tubular configurations; papillary formations with connective tissue cores may project into large tubular structures. A microcystic architecture is sometimes present. Psammoma bodies are present in 5–10% of cases and represent a non-specific finding. The lining cells are usually cuboidal, and, as in effusion samples, the presence of cells with a columnar morphology is more suggestive of adenocarcinoma. Nuclei are often very bland. Less differentiated tumours may consist partly or wholly of sheets of cells without tubular or papillary patterns. These cells may show lack of cohesion, another useful discriminant from adenocarcinoma.
Controversy remains as to which immunohistochemical markers are of greatest value although there is general acceptance that distinction between mesothelioma and adenocarcinoma requires the use of a panel of antibodies rather than reliance on a single immunohistochemical result. The component antibodies included in these panels are undergoing change, with the recent commercial availability of several novel antibodies positive in mesothelioma.
Effusion cytology
Approximately 60% of mesotheliomas can be diagnosed on morphological grounds in effusion specimens; 20% require additional ancillary studies (immunohistochemistryor EM) and 20% are undiagnosable by cytology, either due to inadequacy of the sample or the poorly differentiated nature of the tumour. We advocate the routine use of ancillary immunohistochemical studies in all cases.
Histology
Distinguishing between mesothelioma and adenocarcinoma in biopsy specimens presents similar problems to those encountered in cytological specimens. Often, the morphological clues present in a cytology specimen are not as easily recognised in biopsy material, particularly in small or distorted samples. The diagnostic sensitivity of a small biopsy is less than that of an effusion specimen, as the latter reflects cell shedding from a total serosal surface bathed in fluid. Classical features of well differentiated epithelial mesothelioma in biopsy material include tubulo-papillary or tubular configurations; papillary formations with connective tissue cores may project into large tubular structures. A microcystic architecture is sometimes present. Psammoma bodies are present in 5–10% of cases and represent a non-specific finding. The lining cells are usually cuboidal, and, as in effusion samples, the presence of cells with a columnar morphology is more suggestive of adenocarcinoma. Nuclei are often very bland. Less differentiated tumours may consist partly or wholly of sheets of cells without tubular or papillary patterns. These cells may show lack of cohesion, another useful discriminant from adenocarcinoma.
Comments
Post a Comment