Online citations, reference lists, and bibliographies.
← Back to Search

Pathology Analysis For Mesothelioma Study In The United Kingdom: Current Practice And Historical Development

B. Case
Published 2016 · Medicine

Cite This
Download PDF
Analyze on Scholarcy
ABSTRACT Following up on the largest case-control study of malignant mesothelioma yet performed, investigators at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine assessed 1732 male and 670 female cases as of May 2013. Epidemiological findings of a subset of these were published previously, excluding patients who died or who refused to be interviewed. Pathology reports were collected for subjects, including those both eligible and ineligible for epidemiology study based on vital status. The current investigation examined 860 cases having pathology reports available. Sixty-one cases were diagnosed using cytology only, often with equivocal diagnoses, while 799 reported at least a biopsy of the tumor. Of these, 748 had pathology sufficiently detailed for evaluation. These reports were examined for basis of diagnosis, differences between study cases and ineligible cases, pathology characteristics, and immunohistochemical and other tests used. The most prominent subtype was epithelioid (64% of study cases but only 49% of ineligible cases). Biphasic subtype was present in 10% of study cases and 16% of those ineligible. Sarcomatoid subtype was present in 7% of study cases and 19% of ineligible cases, most of whom died. Twelve percent of study cases displayed no specified subtype, versus 7% of ineligible cases. Of recorded immunohistochemical stains specific for mesothelial cell origin, calretinin (95%) and CK 5/6 or CK5 alone (84%) were by far the most common. Calretinin and CK 5/6 or CK 5 alone were also most sensitive and positive in 92% of cases presenting with surgical pathology report. Ninety percent of cases had at least one immunohistochemical marker for possible lung carcinoma applied, with BER-Ep4 and TTF-1 the most frequent at 68% and CEA at 58%. TTF-1 and CEA were positive in 1% or less of cases. Patterns of use and positive and negative results for each of these as well as other immunohistochemical stains are presented and discussed, along with a brief historical description of their development and use. Possible effects of the pathologic analysis on the results of previously published and future epidemiological studies are discussed.
This paper references
The use of immunohistochemistry to distinguish reactive mesothelial cells from malignant mesothelioma in cytologic effusions
F. Hasteh (2010)
Application of immunohistochemistry in the diagnosis of epithelioid mesothelioma: a review and update.
N. Ordóñez (2013)
Occupational, domestic and environmental mesothelioma risks in the British population: a case–control study
C. Rake (2009)
Re-evaluation of histological diagnoses of malignant mesothelioma by immunohistochemistry
H. Sandeck (2010)
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
A. Hjerpe (2015)
Expression of keratin 5 as a distinctive feature of epithelial and biphasic mesotheliomas
R. Moll (1989)
Expression of Calretinin, Thrombomodulin, Keratin 5, and Mesothelin in Lung Carcinomas of Different Types: An Immunohistochemical Analysis of 596 Tumors in Comparison With Epithelioid Mesotheliomas of the Pleura
M. Miettinen (2003)
Iterative Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Recurrent or Progressive Diffuse Malignant Peritoneal Mesothelioma: Clinicopathologic Characteristics and Survival Outcome
Facs Chukwuemeka Ihemelandu MD (2014)
Absence of carcinoembryonic antigen‐like material in mesothelioma An immunohistochemical differentiation from other lung cancers
N. Wang (1979)
Time Trends and Occupational Risk Factors for Peritoneal Mesothelioma in Sweden
K. Hemminki (2003)
Challenges and controversies in the diagnosis of mesothelioma: Part 1. Cytology-only diagnosis, biopsies, immunohistochemistry, discrimination between mesothelioma and reactive mesothelial hyperplasia, and biomarkers
D. Henderson (2013)
Role of immunohistochemistry in differentiating epithelial mesothelioma from adenocarcinoma. Review and update.
N. Ordóñez (1999)
Calretinin: a novel immunocytochemical marker for mesothelioma.
C. Doglioni (1996)
Diagnostic utility of immunohistochemistry in distinguishing between epithelioid pleural mesotheliomas and breast carcinomas: a comparative study.
N. Ordóñez (2014)
The calcium binding protein calretinin is a selective marker for malignant pleural mesotheliomas of the epithelial type.
V. Gotzos (1996)
Personalized Oncogenomics: Clinical Experience with Malignant Peritoneal Mesothelioma Using Whole Genome Sequencing
B. Sheffield (2015)
The Immunohistochemical Diagnosis of Mesothelioma: A Comparative Study of Epithelioid Mesothelioma and Lung Adenocarcinoma
N. Ordóñez (2003)
Pleural mesothelioma and lung cancer risks in relation to occupational history and asbestos lung burden
C. Gilham (2015)
Occupational, domestic and environmental mesothelioma risks in Britain
J. Peto (2009)
Primary tumours of the pleura.
W. Mccaughey (1958)
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
A. Hjerpe (2015)
Asbestos exposure and differences in occurrence of peritoneal mesothelioma between men and women across countries
A. Burdorf (2007)
Electron Microscopy Remains the Gold Standard for the Diagnosis of Epithelial Malignant Mesothelioma: A Case Study
E. A. Oczypok (2015)
Malignant Mesothelioma Diagnosis.
Qudsia Arif (2015)
Anti‐cytokeratin 5/6: a positive marker for epithelioid mesothelioma
J. Clover (1997)
Differential Susceptibility of Human Pleural and Peritoneal Mesothelial Cells to Asbestos Exposure
J. Dragon (2015)
Cytokeratin 5/6 Immunostaining in Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Neoplasms
Dmitry M Vlasoff (2002)
Diffuse Pleural Mesothelioma and Asbestos Exposure in the North Western Cape Province
J. Wagner (1960)
Pleural mesothelioma surveillance: validity of cases from a tumour registry.
F. Labrèche (2012)
Expression of Thrombomodulin, Calretinin, Cytokeratin 5/6, D2–40 and WT-1 in a Series of Primary Carcinomas of the Lung: An Immunohistochemical Study in Comparison with Epithelioid Pleural Mesothelioma
C. Comin (2014)
WHO classification of tumours of the lung, pleura, thymus and heart
W. Travis (2015)
The evolving role of effusion cytology in the diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma
A. Paintal (2015)
An immunohistochemical comparison of two TTF-1 monoclonal antibodies in atypical squamous lesions and sarcomatoid carcinoma of the lung, and pleural malignant mesothelioma*
S. Klebe (2015)
[Immunohistochemistry in the differential diagnosis of mesothelioma and adenocarcinoma. Evaluation of 5 new antibodies and 6 traditional antibodies].
M. Chenard-Neu (1998)
Guidelines for pathologic diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma: 2012 update of the consensus statement from the International Mesothelioma Interest Group.
A. Husain (2013)
Pleural and peritoneal mesotheliomas in SEER: age effects and temporal trends, 1973–2005
S. Moolgavkar (2009)
p40 is the Best Marker for Diagnosing Pulmonary Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Comparison With p63, Cytokeratin 5/6, Desmocollin-3, and Sox2
Takahiro Tatsumori (2014)
Guidelines for the Cytopathologic Diagnosis of Epithelioid and Mixed-Type Malignant Mesothelioma
A. Hjerpe (2015)
Immunohistochemistry in the diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma: Trends in Australia and a literature review
Anthony Linton (2013)

This paper is referenced by
Semantic Scholar Logo Some data provided by SemanticScholar