SPECIAL STAINS/
IMMUNOPEROXIDASE/
OTHER | CHARACTERIZATION |
GENERAL | |
- Evaluation of 12 antibodies for distinguishing epithelioid mesothelioma from adenocarcinoma: identification of a three-antibody immunohistochemical panel with maximal sensitivity and specificity.
Yaziji H, Battifora H, Barry TS, Hwang HC, Bacchi CE, McIntosh MW, Kussick SJ, Gown AM.
|
-
We evaluated the sensitivity and specificity of 10 monoclonal and two polyclonal antibodies for distinguishing epithelioid mesothelioma from adenocarcinoma (AdCA) using immunohistochemistry (IHC). The antibodies were directed against the mesothelial-associated antigens mesothelin, calretinin, cytokeratin 5, thrombomodulin, Wilms' tumor-1 (WT-1) gene product and HBME-1, and the nonmesothelial antigens Lewis-Y blood group (antibody BG8), MOC-31, BerEp4, CD15, and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) family. The 133 tumors evaluated included 65 malignant epithelioid mesotheliomas, 22 lung AdCAs, 27 ovarian serous carcinomas, 24 breast carcinomas, and five gastric carcinomas. Diagnoses were based on clinical, histologic, ultrastructural, and/or IHC findings.
Calretinin had the best sensitivity for mesothelioma (95%), followed by HBME-1 (84%), WT-1 (78%), cytokeratin 5 (76%), mesothelin (75%), and vimentin and thrombomodulin (68%). Thrombomodulin had the best specificity for mesothelioma (92%), followed by cytokeratin 5 (89%), calretinin (87%) vimentin (84%), and HBME-1 (45%). When ovarian carcinomas were excluded from the analysis, the specificity of mesothelin and WT-1 for the diagnosis of mesothelioma increased to 90 and 81%, respectively. The sensitivity of the nonmesothelial antigens for AdCA was organ dependent, with BG8 performing best in the breast cancer group (96%), and BerEp4, BG8, MOC-31 performing best in the lung cancer group (100%). The specificity of the nonmesothelial antigens for AdCA was 98% for BG8 and CEA, 97% for CD15, 95% for BerEp4, and 87% for MOC-31.
A novel statistical analysis technique employing logic regression analysis identified a three-antibody immunohistochemical panel including calretinin, BG8, and MOC-31, which provided over 96% sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing epithelioid mesothelioma from AdCA.
|
-
Diffuse malignant mesothelioma of the peritoneum and pleura, analysis of markers.
Trupiano JK, Geisinger KR, Willingham MC, Manders P, Zbieranski N, Case D, Levine EA.
Department of Pathology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.
|
-
Mod Pathol. 2004 Apr;17(4):476-81. Abstract quote | |
Diffuse malignant mesothelioma of the peritoneum is a rare diagnosis. Despite many histopathologic similarities between peritoneal and pleural tumors, clinical and prognostic features may be quite different. There is a paucity of data evaluating molecular features of peritoneal mesotheliomas.
Therefore, we compared the results of a battery of immunohistochemical markers, some with therapeutic implications, in patients with primary peritoneal or pleural mesotheliomas.
We examined 24 peritoneal and nine pleural malignant mesotheliomas with a battery of immunohistochemical markers (cytokeratin AE1/3, calretinin, c-kit/CD117, desmin, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), estrogen receptors (ER), progesterone receptors (PR), MIB-1, and cleaved caspase-3) in an attempt to distinguish any differences in this tumor arising in these two distinct locations.
The results indicate that the only marker to show a significant difference in its staining pattern between these two sites was EGFR (P=0.0004). In all, 92% (22/24) of peritoneal tumors demonstrated 3+ or 4+ immunoreactivity with EGFR, opposed to only 33% (3/9) pleural tumors. There was no significant difference in immunoreactivity between the pleural and peritoneal tumors with c-kit, ER, PR, cleaved caspase 3, calretinin, and desmin. There was a trend toward increased cytokeratin (P=0.07) and MIB-1 (P=0.08) expression in the peritoneal group. There was no significant difference in age, sex, or histologic subtype between the two locations.
In conclusion, despite similarities between peritoneal and pleural mesothelioma, there are differences between this neoplasm arising in these two sites. The EGFR expression is more pronounced in peritoneal tumors compared to pleural tumors. The increased expression of EGFR in the peritoneal lesions may be of clinical significance with the recent emergence of epidermal growth factor receptor-targeted therapies.
|
The immunohistochemical diagnosis of mesothelioma: a comparative study of epithelioid mesothelioma and lung adenocarcinoma.
Ordonez NG.
| Am J Surg Pathol. 2003 Aug;27(8):1031-51. Abstract quote A large number of immunohistochemical markers that can facilitate the distinction between epithelioid pleural mesotheliomas and pulmonary peripheral adenocarcinomas have recently become available.
The aim of this study is to compare the value of these new markers with others that are already commonly used for this purpose and to determine which are, at present, the best for discriminating between these malignancies.
Sixty epithelioid mesotheliomas and 50 lung adenocarcinomas were investigated for expression of the following markers: calretinin, cytokeratin 5/6, WT1, thrombomodulin, mesothelin, CD44S, HBME-1, N-cadherin, E-cadherin, MOC-31, thyroid transcription factor-1 (TTF-1), BG-8 (Lewisy), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), Ber-EP4, B72.3 (TAG-72), leu-M1 (CD15), CA19-9, epithelial membrane antigen (EMA), and vimentin. All (100%) of the mesotheliomas reacted for calretinin, cytokeratin 5/6, and mesothelin, 93% for WT1, 93% for EMA, 85% for HBME-1, 77% for thrombomodulin; 73% for CD44S, 73% for N-cadherin, 55% for vimentin, 40% for E-cadherin, 18% for Ber-EP4, 8% for MOC-31, 7% for BG-8, and none for CEA, B72.3, leu-M1, TTF-1, or CA19-9. Of the adenocarcinomas, 100% were positive for MOC-31, Ber-EP4, and EMA, 96% for BG-8, 88% for CEA, 88% for E-cadherin, 84% for B72.3, 74% for TTF-1, 72% for leu-M1, 68% for HBME-1, 48% for CD44S, 48% for CA19-9, 38% for mesothelin, 38% for vimentin, 30% for N-cadherin, 14% for thrombomodulin, 8% for calretinin, 2% for cytokeratin 5/6, and none for WT1.
After analyzing the results, it is concluded that calretinin, cytokeratin 5/6, and WT1 are the best positive markers for differentiating epithelioid malignant mesothelioma from pulmonary adenocarcinoma.
The best discriminators among the antibodies considered to be negative markers for mesothelioma are CEA, MOC-31, Ber-EP4, BG-8, and B72.3. A panel of four markers (two positive and two negative) selected based upon availability and which ones yield good staining results in a given laboratory is recommended.
Because of their specificity and sensitivity for mesotheliomas, the best combination appears to be calretinin and cytokeratin 5/6 (or WT1) for the positive markers and CEA and MOC-31 (or B72.3, Ber-EP4, or BG-8) for the negative markers. An extensive and detailed review of the literature is also provided. |
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.
Miettinen M, Sarlomo-Rikala M.
| Am J Surg Pathol 2003 Feb;27(2):150-8 Abstract quote Several immunohistochemical markers, among them calretinin, thrombomodulin (CD141), keratin 5, and mesothelin, have been documented or suggested as useful markers for positive identification of mesothelioma and to differentiate it from pulmonary adenocarcinoma; numerous studies have documented their variable specificity. However, expression of these markers in other types of lung carcinomas has not been systematically explored, although these tumors can enter in the differential diagnosis of mesothelioma.
In this study we immunohistochemically evaluated 596 lung carcinomas of different types for the four above-mentioned mesothelioma markers, all of which reacted with a great majority of epithelioid mesotheliomas studied for comparison. Calretinin expression was common in giant cell carcinomas (67%), small cell carcinomas (49%), and large cell carcinomas (38%), whereas it was rare in usual adenocarcinomas but slightly more common in those with neuroendocrine differentiation (11% and 17%, respectively). Thrombomodulin was present in all keratinizing squamous carcinomas and the great majority (87%) of nonkeratinizing tumors in a membrane-staining pattern. It was moderately common in small cell (27%) and large cell carcinomas (25%) but relatively rare in adenocarcinomas (13%). Keratin 5 was expressed in all keratinizing and the great majority (87%) of nonkeratinizing squamous carcinomas, and a majority of large cell carcinomas (56%) and some small cell carcinomas (27%). It was rare in acinar adenocarcinomas (12%) and absent in those with neuroendocrine differentiation. Mesothelin was present in more than half (53%) of adenocarcinomas and a minority (13%) of large cell carcinomas but was absent in small cell carcinomas. In squamous carcinomas it was more often seen in nonkeratinizing versus keratinizing tumors (31% vs 16%).
These results show that each of these "mesothelioma" markers reacts with different subsets of pulmonary carcinomas with a variable frequency; this should be considered when using these markers in the differential diagnosis of thoracic tumors.
|
Value of Thyroid Transcription Factor-1, E-Cadherin, BG8, WT1, and CD44S Immunostaining in Distinguishing Epithelial Pleural Mesothelioma From Pulmonary and Nonpulmonary Adenocarcinoma
Nelson G. Ordóñez, M.D.
From the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, U.S.A. | Am J Surg Pathol 2000;24:598-606 Abstract quote
The distinction between malignant pleural mesotheliomas and adenocarcinomas, particularly those originating in the lung, is a difficult diagnostic problem that can be facilitated by the use of immunohistochemical markers.
In this study, the immunoreactivity of thyroid transcription factor-1 (TTF-1), E-cadherin, BG8, WT1, and CD44S was investigated in 50 epithelial mesotheliomas, and 40 pulmonary and 95 nonpulmonary adenocarcinomas. After analyzing the results, it was concluded that E-cadherin and BG8 are useful markers for distinguishing between epithelial mesotheliomas and adenocarcinomas of various origins, including the lung.
Because TTF-1 expression is found almost exclusively in adenocarcinomas of the lung but is absent in mesotheliomas, immunostaining for this marker is particularly useful for distinguishing between these two malignancies. Although WT1 immunostaining may also be useful, its value, as determined in this study, is lower than that reported by other investigators. CD44S immunostaining does not have any practical value in discriminating between epithelial mesothelioma and lung adenocarcinoma. |
Immunohistochemical Analysis Still Has a Limited Role in the Diagnosis of Malignant Mesothelioma A Study of Thirteen Antibodies
Fiona Roberts, MRCPath, Christina M. Harper, MBChB, Ian Downie, MSc, and Rodney A. Burnett, FRCPath | Am J Clin Pathol 2001;116:253-262 Abstract quote
To identify the most accurate and useful panel to diagnose mesothelioma, we immunostained sections from 112 mesotheliomas, 18 adenocarcinomas, and 11 reactive pleural specimens with 13 antibodies.
Positive results for mesotheliomas, adenocarcinomas, and reactive pleura, respectively, were CAM5.2, 111, 18, and 11; vimentin, 30, 3, and 3; HBME-1, 75, 10, and 8; thrombomodulin, 31, 2, and 2; calretinin, 43, 6, and 11; and CD44H, 68, 10, and 4. Positive results for adenocarcinoma markers in mesotheliomas and adenocarcinomas, respectively, were carcinoembryonic antigen, 1 and 15; LeuM1, 7 and 9; and Ber-EP4, 5 and 12. All reactive pleura were negative.
Positive results for markers to help distinguish mesothelioma from reactive pleura in mesotheliomas, adenocarcinomas, and reactive pleura, respectively, were epithelial membrane antigen, 76, 17, and 6; p53, 78, 16, and 9; P-170 glycoprotein, 37, 4, and 2; and platelet-derived growth factor receptor beta, 31, 1, and 2.
The differential diagnosis of mesothelioma from adenocarcinoma is based on negative markers. Individual mesothelial markers are of low sensitivity and specificity for mesothelioma. However, diagnostic accuracy is improved by the use of antibody panels. To date there are no antibodies that help distinguish mesothelioma from reactive pleura. |
Use of a Panel of Markers in the Differential Diagnosis of Adenocarcinoma and Reactive Mesothelial Cells in Fluid Cytology
Ellen C. Ko, MD, Nirag C. Jhala, MD, Jana J. Shultz, MT(ASCP)SH, QIHC, and David C. Chhieng, MD | Am J Clin Pathol 2001;116:709-715 Abstract quote
To evaluate the use of a panel of markers to differentiate adenocarcinoma and reactive/ inflammatory process in fluid cytology, we stained 29 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded cell blocks of effusion fluid from patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma and 24 cell blocks from patients with benign effusion with mucicarmine and antibodies to carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), B72.3, and calretinin.
Positive staining with CEA, B72.3, and mucicarmine was seen in 22 (76%),20 (69%), and 18 (60%) adenocarcinoma cases, respectively. All except 1 adenocarcinoma was negative for calretinin. No benign cases were positive for B72.3 and mucicarmine. In 1 benign case, scattered epithelial cells demonstrated weak positivity for CEA. The majority of combinations were 100% specific for adenocarcinoma. The highest sensitivity (86%) for adenocarcinomas was achieved with the staining combination of negative for calretinin and positive for any adenocarcinoma marker (CEA, B72.3, or mucicarmine).
The use of a panel of markers that recognize adenocarcinoma and mesothelial cells is useful in the differential diagnosis between metastatic adenocarcinoma and reactive/inflammatory process. The profile of positive staining with at least one of the adenocarcinoma markers and negative calretinin staining is highly specific and sensitive for identifying adenocarcinoma in fluid cytology. |
The Role of Desmin and N-Cadherin in Effusion Cytology A Comparative Study Using Established Markers of Mesothelial and Epithelial Cells
Ben Davidson, M.D. , Ph.D. ; Søren Nielsen, C.T. ; Jette Christensen, C.T. ; Pia Asschenfeldt, M.D. ; Aasmund Berner, M.D. , Ph.D. ; Bjørn Risberg, M.D. , Ph.D. ; Preben Johansen, M.D.
From the Department of Pathology (Division of Cytology) (B.D., A.B., B.R.), Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo, Norway; and the Department of Pathology (S.N., J.C., P.A., P.J.), Aalborg Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark. | Am J Surg Pathol 2001;25:1405-1412 Abstract quote
The objective of the present study was to analyze the role of the mesothelial markers desmin and N-cadherin in the diagnostic panel of serous effusions.
A total of 181 pleural and peritoneal effusions consisted of 101 cases cytologically diagnosed as malignant (89 carcinomas, 12 mesotheliomas), 78 benign, and 2 inconclusive specimens. All specimens were immunostained using 11 antibodies, against epithelial membrane antigen, Ber-EP4, carcinoembryonic antigen, E-cadherin, CA 125, N-cadherin, desmin, calretinin, p53, vimentin, and CD45. After evaluation of immunocytochemistry results, 110 specimens were diagnosed as malignant (98 carcinomas, 12 mesotheliomas) and 71 as benign (56 cellular, 15 paucicellular). The presence of desmin was detected in benign mesothelial cells in 47 of 56 (84%) reactive cellular specimens compared with 1 of 12 (8%) malignant mesotheliomas and 2 of 98 (2%) carcinomas. N-cadherin was expressed in 48 of 56 (86%) reactive cases, 12 of 12 (100%) mesotheliomas, and 47 of 98 (48%) carcinomas.
In carcinomas, N-cadherin expression was most often seen in ovarian carcinoma but was also found in other carcinomas. Calretinin, an established marker of mesothelial cells, was detected in 52 of 56 (93%) reactive specimens, 11 of 12 (93%) mesotheliomas, and 3 of 98 (3%) carcinomas. Evaluation of staining results led to reclassification of six malignant specimens as benign, whereas 17 cases diagnosed as benign and the two diagnosed as inconclusive were classified as malignant.
In conclusion, desmin appears to be a promising marker for the distinction between reactive mesothelium and malignant epithelial cells in terms of both specificity and sensitivity, and its complementary use with calretinin is recommended. Unlike calretinin, it may also prove valuable for the distinction between benign and malignant mesothelial cells. N-cadherin does not have a role in the distinction between mesothelial and epithelial cells. However, it may prove useful in the characterization of carcinomas of unknown origin. As has previously been shown, a significant number of diagnoses that are based on morphologic examination alone are modified after the use of a broad antibody panel. |
Immunohistochemical diagnosis of epithelioid mesotheliomas: A critical review of old markers, new markers.
Ordonez NG.
University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX. | Hum Pathol 2002 Oct;33(10):953-67 Abstract quote Numerous new immunohistochemical markers that can be used in the diagnosis of mesothelioma have recently become available. As a result, new panels of antibodies that could be useful for distinguishing between epithelioid mesotheliomas and adenocarcinomas have been proposed. However, great differences of opinion exist regarding the individual value of some of these markers, especially when compared with those whose value has already been established.
This article provides a critical review of the currently available information on those markers that could be useful in the diagnosis of epithelioid mesotheliomas or whose utility remains controversial. A practical approach to the diagnosis of these tumors is also provided. |
h-CALDESMON | |
- h-Caldesmon, a Useful Positive Marker in the Diagnosis of Pleural Malignant Mesothelioma, Epithelioid Type.
Comin CE, Dini S, Novelli L, Santi R, Asirelli G, Messerini L.
Department of Human Pathology and Oncology, University of Florence Medical School, Florence, Italy.
|
-
Although a large number of immunohistochemical markers that can facilitate the differential diagnosis between epithelioid pleural mesothelioma and lung adenocarcinoma involving the pleura have proven to be valuable, no single antibody has demonstrated absolute sensitivity and/or specificity in making this distinction.
Using immunohistochemical analysis with h-caldesmon, a specific marker for smooth muscle tumors, we examined 70 cases of epithelial mesotheliomas and 70 cases of lung adenocarcinomas. In addition, immunohistochemistry for muscle markers, such as desmin, alpha-smooth-muscle actin, muscle-specific actin, myoglobin, myogenin, myosin, and MyoD-1, was performed on all mesothelioma cases. Reactivity for h-caldesmon was obtained in 68 (97%) of the 70 epithelial mesotheliomas, but in none of the adenocarcinoma cases. All mesothelioma cases were found to be negative for the other muscle markers examined.
We conclude that h-caldesmon is a highly sensitive and specific marker and suggest its inclusion in the immunohistochemical panel for the differential diagnosis of epithelioid mesothelioma versus lung adenocarcinoma.
|
CALRETININ | |
Calretinin and Other Mesothelioma Markers in Synovial Sarcoma Analysis of Antigenic Similarities and Differences With Malignant Mesothelioma
Markku Miettinen, etal. | Am J Surg Pathol 2001;25:610-617 Abstract quote
Synovial sarcoma (SS) is a mesenchymal neoplasm that typically shows epithelial differentiation. SS commonly metastasizes to lung and pleura, and has also been reported as the primary in these locations. The histologic distinction of SS from mesothelioma may be difficult because of the combination of epithelioid and spindle cells, potentially shared locations, and antigenic expression.
In this study the authors examined 103 well-documented SSs including 41 biphasic, 44 monophasic, and 18 poorly differentiated SSs in comparison with 23 epithelioid and seven sarcomatous mesotheliomas. Most biphasic SSs (29 of 41, 71%) had fields or foci of calretinin-positive tumor cells. The spindle cell components were more often positive (55%), whereas 14% of tumors had positive epithelial cells.
The monophasic and poorly differentiated SSs commonly had foci of calretinin-positive cells (in 52% and 56% of cases respectively). In comparison, all 23 epithelioid mesotheliomas (EM) were extensively calretinin positive and seven sarcomatoid mesotheliomas were variably calretinin positive. HBME-1 positivity was similarly detected in biphasic SS and EM (100% and 87% respectively). Among the other sarcomas, two of 15 malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors were focally calretinin positive, whereas 16 epithelioid sarcomas, 20 leiomyosarcomas, 20 gastrointestinal stromal tumors, and 20 angiosarcomas were negative. Biphasic SSs differed from mesotheliomas by their more common BerEp4 positivity (90%) whereas EMs showed focal reactivity in 13% cases. Marked CD15 reactivity was rare in both. Wilms tumor protein-1 (WT1) was not detected in SS, but was present in 12 of 17 EMs. CD141 was rare in SS, limited to spindle cell components, whereas EMs typically showed prominent membrane staining in epithelial cells. Simple epithelial keratins were present in all epithelial cells of biphasic SS and mesothelioma (keratin 7[K7], K19), but were only focal in monophasic and poorly differentiated SS. Biphasic SSs were extensively K14 positive (89% of cases), whereas epithelial and sarcomatoid mesotheliomas typically showed only scattered positive cells.
The potentially shared calretinin patterns in SS and mesothelioma require the use of other markers. The discriminating features include extensive BerEp4 positivity, rarity of CD141, and lack of WT1 in SS. Global expression of K7 and K19 in mesotheliomas versus focal expression in monophasic and poorly differentiated SSs, and differential patterns of K14 expression may also be helpful. |
CYTOKERATIN | |
Expression of Cytokeratin 5/6 in Epithelial Neoplasms: An Immunohistochemical Study of 509 Cases
Peiguo G. Chu, M.D., Ph.D. and Lawrence M. Weiss, M.D.
Department of Pathology, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, California Correspondence: Address reprint requests to: Peiguo G. Chu, M.D., Ph.D., Department of Pathology, City of Hope National Medical Center, 1500 East Duarte Road, Duarte, CA 91010. | Mod Pathol 2002;15:6-10 Abstract quote
Cytokeratin 5/6 (CK 5/6) immunoreactivity has been observed in the vast majority of cases of malignant mesothelioma but only rarely in pulmonary adenocarcinomas. Thus, CK 5/6 has been used to distinguish malignant mesothelioma from pulmonary adenocarcinoma. However, the utility of CK 5/6 in distinguishing pleural malignant mesothelioma from pleural metastases from nonpulmonary adenocarcinoma, as well as peritoneal malignant mesothelioma from peritoneal metastatic adenocarcinoma, has not yet been adequately addressed because the tissue expression of CK 5/6 in nonpulmonary neoplasms has not been well defined.
We have studied the CK 5/6 expression in 509 cases of various epithelial tumors by immunohistochemistry. We found that the vast majority of cases of squamous cell carcinoma, basal cell carcinoma, thymoma, salivary gland tumor, and biphasic malignant mesothelioma were positive for CK 5/6. In addition, CK 5/6 immunoreactivity was detected in 15 of 24 cases (62%) of transitional cell carcinoma, in 5 of 10 cases (50%) of endometrial adenocarcinoma, in about one third of cases of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (38%) and breast adenocarcinoma (31%), and in one quarter of cases of ovarian adenocarcinomas (25%).
Our study confirms the diagnostic utility of CK 5/6 immunohistochemistry in distinguishing biphasic mesothelioma from pulmonary adenocarcinoma but raises caution about its use for the differential diagnosis of pleural or peritoneal malignant mesothelioma versus pleural or peritoneal metastatic nonpulmonary adenocarcinoma, because many types of nonpulmonary adenocarcinomas may be positive for CK 5/6. |
ESTROGEN AND PROGESTERONE RECEPTORS | |
- Value of estrogen and progesterone receptor immunostaining in distinguishing between peritoneal mesotheliomas and serous carcinomas.
Ordonez NG.
Department of Pathology, The University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
|
-
Hum Pathol. 2005 Nov;36(11):1163-7. Epub 2005 Sep 22. Abstract quote | |
The differential diagnosis between peritoneal mesotheliomas and serous carcinomas involving the peritoneum may be difficult, but it can be facilitated by the use of immunohistochemistry.
To determine whether estrogen receptors (ER) or progesterone receptors (PR) may have any value as immunohistochemical markers for discriminating between these malignancies, 40 serous carcinomas of the ovary metastatic to the peritoneum, 7 primary peritoneal serous carcinomas, 30 epithelioid peritoneal malignant mesotheliomas, 5 well-differentiated papillary mesotheliomas, and 4 adenomatoid tumors were immunostained for ER and PR. Reactivity for ER was obtained in 35 (88%) of the metastatic serous carcinomas of the ovary and 6 (86%) of the primary peritoneal serous carcinomas, whereas positivity for PR was observed in 24 (60%) of the metastatic serous carcinomas and 4 (56%) of the primary peritoneal serous carcinomas. None of the mesotheliomas or adenomatoid tumors expressed ER or PR.
It is concluded that, because of its high sensitivity for serous carcinomas, ER immunostaining could be very useful in distinguishing between serous carcinomas and peritoneal mesotheliomas. Immunostaining for PR, however, has little practical utility.
|
HER2-NEU (c-ERB-B2) | |
Malignant mesothelioma does not demonstrate overexpression or gene amplification despite cytoplasmic immunohistochemical staining for c-Erb-B2.
Horvai AE, Li L, Xu Z, Kramer MJ, Jablons DM, Treseler PA.
Department of Pathology, University of California, San Francisco 94143, USA. | Arch Pathol Lab Med 2003 Apr;127(4):465-9 Abstract quote BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown conflicting results regarding the expression of c-Erb-B2 in malignant mesothelioma. Overexpression of the c-erb-B2 gene product in a subset of mesothelioma may have prognostic or therapeutic implications.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether malignant mesothelioma demonstrates c-Erb-B2 overexpression and, if so, whether such overexpression correlates with gene amplification.
METHODS: Immunohistochemistry, reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction, and fluorescent in situ hybridization were used to analyze archived tissue from 37 cases of malignant mesothelioma.
RESULTS: Although immunohistochemical staining for c-Erb-B2 was detected in most mesotheliomas, the staining was cytoplasmic and was not consistent between the 2 different primary antibodies used. Moreover, even cases with strong cytoplasmic staining for c-Erb-B2 did not demonstrate increased messenger RNA levels or gene copy numbers compared to cases that demonstrated no staining.
CONCLUSIONS: Cytoplasmic immunoreactivity for c-Erb-B2 in mesothelioma does not represent gene overexpression or amplification and may be an immunohistochemical artifact. |
MESOTHELIN | |
Value of mesothelin immunostaining in the diagnosis of mesothelioma.
Ordonez NG.
University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
| Mod Pathol 2003 Mar;16(3):192-7 Abstract quote Mesothelin is a cell surface antigen of unknown function that is strongly expressed in mesothelial cells. Although it was reported in 1992 that immunostaining with the K1 anti-mesothelin antibody could be very useful in distinguishing between epithelioid mesotheliomas and pulmonary adenocarcinomas, no further studies have been published on the value of this marker in the diagnosis of mesotheliomas.
To determine whether mesothelin can assist in discriminating epithelioid mesotheliomas from lung adenocarcinomas or from other carcinomas metastatic to the serosal membranes, 55 mesotheliomas (44 epithelioid, 3 biphasic, and 8 sarcomatoid), 48 carcinomas of the lung (31 adenocarcinomas, 17 squamous carcinomas), and 86 nonpulmonary adenocarcinomas (14 ovary, 5 peritoneum, 9 endometrium, 11 pancreas, 4 stomach, 16 colon, 12 breast, 9 kidney, 4 thyroid, and 2 prostate) were investigated for mesothelin expression using the recently available 5B2 anti-mesothelin monoclonal antibody.
Reactivity was obtained in all 44 (100%) of the epithelioid mesotheliomas, 12 (39%) of the lung adenocarcinomas, and 42 (49%) of the nonpulmonary adenocarcinomas (14 [100%] ovary; 5 [100%] peritoneum; 6 [67%] endometrium; 10 [91%] pancreas; 2 [50%] stomach; 5 [31%] colon; and in none [0] of the breast, kidney, thyroid, or prostate). Three (18%) of the squamous carcinomas of the lung, but none of the sarcomatoid mesotheliomas, exhibited positivity for this marker, nor was any reactivity seen in the spindle cell component of the biphasic mesotheliomas. It is concluded that despite the low specificity of mesothelin for discriminating between epithelioid mesotheliomas and adenocarcinomas, immunostaining for this marker may have some utility in those instances in which the results obtained with the standard panel of immunohistochemical markers used for the diagnosis of mesotheliomas are equivocal.
Because mesothelin is a highly sensitive positive marker for epithelioid mesotheliomas, a negative staining for this marker is an indication against such a diagnosis; however, because of its limited utility, it is not recommended for inclusion in the standard panel of immunohistochemical markers used in the distinction between mesotheliomas and adenocarcinomas. |
MUC4 | |
Diagnostic value of MUC4 immunostaining in distinguishing epithelial mesothelioma and lung adenocarcinoma.
Llinares K, Escande F, Aubert S, Buisine MP, de Bolos C, Batra SK, Gosselin B, Aubert JP, Porchet N, Copin MC.
Unite INSERM U560 Laboratoire de Recherche Gerard Biserte, Place de Verdun, Lille, France.
|
Mod Pathol. 2004 Feb;17(2):150-7. Abstract quote | |
The distinction between pleural malignant mesothelioma and pleural infiltration by adenocarcinomas has complex therapeutic and medicolegal implications.
Although the panel of adenocarcinoma-associated antibodies and one or two mesothelioma markers is useful in this purpose, most of these antibodies are not totally specific. We determined the diagnostic value of MUC4 immunostaining in this issue. MUC4 gene expression was also studied by in situ hybridization and RT-PCR. MUC4 is a membrane-bound mucin that has been suggested to be implicated in malignant progression in humans and rats. The MUC4 gene is expressed in various normal epithelial tissues of endodermic origin and carcinomas. In the respiratory tract, MUC4 transcripts have been detected in normal respiratory epithelium and lung carcinomas. MUC4 protein was expressed in 32 of 35 (91.4%) lung adenocarcinomas on paraffin-embedded tissue. None of the 41 malignant mesotheliomas nor the 32 cases of benign mesothelial cells expressed MUC4 at the protein and mRNA levels.
We conclude that MUC4 is a very specific (100%) and sensitive (91.4%) marker of lung adenocarcinomas on paraffin-embedded tissue that could be useful in diagnostic practice in the distinction between malignant mesothelioma and adenocarcinoma. |
TELOMERASE REVERSE TRANSCRIPTASE | |
Expression of Telomerase Reverse Transcriptase (TERT) in Malignant Mesotheliomas Fumiyuki Kumaki, M.D.; Toshiaki Kawai, M.D., Ph.D.; Andrew Churg, M.D.; Françoise B. Galateau-Sallé, M.D.; Philip Hasleton, M.D.; Douglas Henderson, M.D.; Victor Roggli, M.D.; William D. Travis, M.D.; Philip T. Cagle, M.D.; * Victor J. Ferrans, M.D., Ph.D.
From the Pathology Section, National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, U.S.A. (F.K., V.J.F.); National Defense Medical College, Tokorozawa, Japan (T.K.); University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada (A.C.); Center Hospitalier Regional et Universitaire de Caen, France (F.B.G.S.); University of Manchester, Manchester, U.K. (P.H.); Flinders Medical Center, Bedford Park, Australia (D.H.); Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, U.S.A. (V.R.); Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Washington, DC, U.S.A. (W.D.T.); and Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, U.S.A. (P.T.C.). | Am J Surg Pathol 2002;26:365-370 Abstract quote To evaluate the usefulness of determinations of telomerase activity for distinguishing malignant from benign mesothelial lesions, immunohistochemical (using a rabbit polyclonal antibody and the peroxidase method; n = 68) and in situ hybridization (using sense and antisense oligonucleotide probes; n = 46) studies were made on malignant mesotheliomas (epithelioid, 39; sarcomatoid, 18, including 2 of the desmoplastic type; and biphasic, 11) and 19 benign mesothelial lesions (benign mesothelial hyperplasia, 3; and reactive pleuritis, 16). In addition, biochemical studies of telomerase activity were made in 9 of the malignant mesotheliomas.
Telomerase activity was detected histochemically in all but one of the malignant mesotheliomas, but only in one (pleuritis) of the benign lesions, in which it was present only in activated lymphocytes. Antisense hybridization signals indicated the presence of telomerase mRNA mainly in the cytoplasm of the malignant cells. Sense probes gave negative results. Biochemical determinations revealed a strong telomerase activity in the 9 malignant mesotheliomas examined.
This study demonstrates the usefulness of immunohistochemical staining for the evaluation of mesotheliomas. The required immunostaining can be performed using paraffin sections of formalin-fixed tissues. |