Image analysis of mesothelioma. I. differentiation of mesothelioma from adenocarcinoma of the lung

OBJECTIVE: To explore the usefulness of nuclear micromorphometric analysis for the differentiation between epithelial mesothelioma and metastatic adenocarcinoma in the chest wall. STUDY DESIGN: High-resolution images of 2,100 nuclei from 27 cases of epithelial mesothelioma and 15 cases of adenocarcinoma of the lung were recorded. Stepwise discriminant analysis and a nonparametric classifier were applied to derive estimates for a case diagnosis correct classification rate. RESULTS: Nuclei from epithelial mesothelioma and adenocarcinoma of the lung showed statistically significantly different properties, but there was a region of overlap in feature space such that approximately 15-20% of cases could not be correctly classified. The lesion signatures derived from the mesothelioma cases with discriminant function scores that might result in case misclassification and the cases of adenocarcinoma of the lung spanned a similar range of degree of nuclear abnormality. However, the distribution of nuclear abnormality values for the mesothelioma cases has a mode at 0.87 SD from normal, whereas the distribution seen in lung adenocarcinoma cases had a mode at about 3.7 SD. CONCLUSION: Cases of epithelial mesothelioma and adenocarcinoma of the lung have nuclei with a wide range of deviation from normal in the spatial and statistical distribution of their nuclear chromatin. For approximately 80% of cases, correct case classification can be provided by nuclear micromorphometric analysis. Cases of epithelial mesothelioma with highly abnormal nuclei overlap in feature space with nuclei from adenocarcinoma of the lung. However, it is possible that characterization by a lesion signature may allow correct assignment for those cases.     

Computer-assisted differential diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma based on syntactic structure analysis.

BACKGROUND: Malignant mesothelioma, a mesoderm-derived tumor, is related to asbestos exposure and remains a diagnostic challenge because none of the genetic or immunohistochemical markers have yet been proven to be specific. To assist in the identification of mesothelioma and to differentiate it from other common lesions at the same location, we have tested the performance of syntactic structure analysis (SSA) in an automated classification procedure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Light-microscopic images of tissue sections of malignant mesothelioma, hyperplastic mesothelium, and adenocarcinoma were analyzed using parameters selected from the Voronoi diagram, Gabriel's graph, and the minimum spanning tree which were classified with a K-nearest-neighbor algorithm. RESULTS: Results showed that mesotheliomas were diagnosed correctly in 74% of the cases; 76% of the adenocarcinomas were correctly graded, and 88% of the mesotheliomas were correctly typed. The performance of the parameters was dependent on the obtained classification (i.e., tumor-tumor versus tumor-benign). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that SSA is valuable in the differential classification of mesothelioma and that it supplements a visually appraised diagnosis. The recognition scores may be increased by a combination of SSA with, for example, cellular or nuclear parameters, measured at higher magnifications to form a solid base for fully automated expert systems.     

Ultrastructure of pleural mesothelioma and pulmonary adenocarcinoma in malignant effusions as compared with reactive mesothelial cells.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the ultrastructural features of diffuse malignant pleural mesothelioma cells in cytologic specimens from pleural effusions. STUDY DESIGN: We retrospectively studied 35 pleural effusions: 12 diffuse malignant pleural mesotheliomas (8 epithelial type, 4 biphasic type), 12 pulmonary adenocarcinomas and 11 cases of reactive mesothelial cells. RESULTS: In the cytoplasm, reactive and malignant mesothelial cells had more-abundant intermediate filaments (P < .05, P < .01) and fewer free ribosomes (P < .001, P < .001) than adenocarcinoma cells. Reactive mesothelial cells had fewer mitochondria than mesothelioma cells (P < .05). Mesothelioma cells had longer, thinner microvilli on the cell surfaces (P < .001); length/diameter ratios of microvilli were 19.1 +/- 7.0 (mesothelioma) vs. 9.1 +/- 2.2 (adenocarcinoma) and 9.2 +/- 2.4 (mesothelial cells). Giant intercellular junctions (desmosomes or desmosomelike structures > 1 micron in length) were found in eight cases of mesothelioma. Core filaments or rootlets in microvilli were present in two cases of adenocarcinoma. CONCLUSION: Because cytologic specimens from pleural effusions were easy to obtain, we think ultrastructural cytology is useful in distinguishing mesothelioma from adenocarcinoma and benign effusions.     

Cytopathology of malignant mesothelioma. Reappraisal of the diagnostic value of collagen cores

The identification of malignant mesothelial cells in cytological smears prepared from serous effusions is still hampered by the lack of features specific for mesothelial differentiation. We examined the diagnostic value of collagen cores within clusters of tumour cells in cytological smears prepared from effusions from 43 patients with malignant mesothelioma and of 62 cases of metastatic adenocarcinoma. In Giemsa-stained smears collagen cores were detected in 51% of the cases of malignant mesothelioma and in none of the smears with metastatic adenocarcinoma. Using the Azan stain, collagen cores were detected in 64% of the malignant mesotheliomas and 4% of the adenocarcinomas. Immunoelectron microscopy demonstrated that the collagen cores are largely composed of collagen type III fibrils and some elastin embedded in a homogenous extracellular matrix. It can be concluded that the presence of collagen cores within clusters of tumour cells is highly suggestive of mesothelial differentiation and a common finding in malignant mesothelioma.     

The value of calretinin and cytokeratin 5/6 as markers for mesothelioma in cell block preparations of serous effusions

Objective: To determine the value of calretinin and cytokeratin (CK) 5/6 in discriminating mesothelioma from adenocarcinoma in serous effusion specimens. Methods: A total of 101 recent, histologically or clinically confirmed malignant effusions with immunostained cell block preparations were reviewed. The cases consisted of 34 mesotheliomas and 67 adenocarcinomas. This included 17 ascitic fluid and 84 pleural fluid samples. The adenocarcinomas included metastatic carcinomas from the breast (12), lung (19), stomach (3), colon (1), pancreas (2), ovary (6) endometrium (1) and 23 histologically confirmed metastases from unknown primary sites. The cases were assessed as negative or positive (>5% of cells stained). The staining pattern was recorded as cytoplasmic, cell membrane, nuclear or cytoplasmic and nuclear staining. Results: Calretinin staining was present in 97% (33/34) of the mesothelioma cases with a majority of them showing both cytoplasmic and nuclear staining (29/33). Only 3% (2/67) of adenocarcinomas were positive for calretinin, one being a lung adenocarcinoma and the other an adenocarcinoma of unknown primary site in an ascitic fluid. Cytokeratin 5/6 staining was also present in 33/34 (97%) of mesothelioma cases. Six (9%) adenocarcinomas were positive, including metastases from the lung (1), breast (1), ovary (2) and unknown primary site (2). Four of the six adenocarcinoma cases positive for CK5/6 were in ascitic fluids. No cases of mesothelioma were negative for both calretinin and CK5/6. Only one adenocarcinoma case, (which was from unknown primary site in an ascitic fluid sample), was positive for both markers. Conclusions: The results confirm that calretinin and CK 5/6 are useful markers for mesothelioma in effusion specimens. CK5/6 staining may be less useful for peritoneal fluid specimens where metastatic adenocarcinomas may be more likely to express the antigen. Further study of ascitic/peritoneal specimens is warranted. However, positive staining, particularly for both antigens, is highly indicative of a mesothelial origin for cells. The two markers make a useful addition to EMA and the panel of adenocarcinoma markers routinely applied to effusion specimens.     

Appearance of mesothelioma cells in sputum. A case report.

A case in which mesothelioma cells appeared in sputum is reported. There has been only one earlier reported case of the exfoliation of mesothelioma cells into sputum. A postmortem examination in our case disclosed a lepidic growth of mesothelioma cells along the alveolar wall of the lung, suggesting that this mode of spread in the lung was probably responsible for the shedding of tumor cells in sputum. Cytopathologists should be aware of this possibility in differentiating this entity from adenocarcinoma involving the pleura.     

Fine needle aspiration cytology of malignant mesothelioma

The results of fine needle aspiration (FNA) cytology in 19 cases of malignant mesothelioma are presented. Adequate material for a diagnosis of malignancy was obtained in 17 cases, and in 8 cases a specific diagnosis of mesothelioma could be made. In four other cases, the findings were either consistent with or suggestive of mesothelioma; in four, accurate distinction from other neoplasms was not possible, and in two cases, adenocarcinoma was suggested. The spectrum of cytologic findings ranged from neoplasms of purely epithelial appearance through more pleomorphic biphasic neoplasms to anaplastic tumors. A combination of epithelial-like cell clusters, pavement-like sheets of epithelial cells with well-defined cell borders and prominent cell separation, dispersed angular cells with dense cytoplasm and some spindle-cell forms was the most specific cytologic pattern for mesothelioma. In four neoplasms, ultrastructural examination of aspirated material provided the additional evidence for a definitive diagnosis. The identification of hyaluronic acid within intracytoplasmic vacuoles, either in smears or in cell blocks, confirmed the diagnosis in three tumors. Only in one case, with a strong clinical background suggesting mesothelioma, was the cytologic preparation sufficient for diagnosis without ancillary diagnostic methods. FNA is of particular value in the diagnosis of pleural mesothelioma in patients who do not present with a pleural effusion. Obtaining material for cell block preparations, cytochemistry or ultrastructural study is generally necessary for definitive tumor typing.     

Karyometry in endometrial adenocarcinoma of different grades

OBJECTIVE: To characterize nuclei from adenocarcinoma of the endometrium of different grades in order to establish whether significantly different nuclear subpopulations exist. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 1,400 nuclei from 14 cases of adenocarcinoma of the endometrium of grades 1, 2 and 3 were recorded, and 600 nucleifrom normal, secretory phase glandular endometrial epithelium were used as a reference data set. Karyometric features were computed and a discriminant function derived to define a trend in feature values for nuclei from lesions of different grades. The nuclei from lesions of different grades were processed by a nonsupervised learning algorithm in an effort to detect and define subpopulations. RESULTS: Nuclei from grade 1 lesions represented a near-diploid stemline, whereas nuclei from grade 3 lesions formed an aneuploid set with a mode around 3N. The existence of three subpopulations with statistically different nuclear chromatin patterns could be shown for nuclei from each grade. In each grade these three subpopulations occupied the same relative position in feature space. For grade 1 lesions all three subpopulations were near diploid, for grade 3 lesions all three were approximately triploid. CONCLUSION: The nuclei in adenocarcinoma of the endometrium form a heterogeneous set, with subpopulations of distinctly different chromatin patterns and different ploidy. This should be taken into consideration in assessing the efficacy of chemopreventive intervention.     

Progression curves for endometrial lesions

OBJECTIVE: To derive a numeric measure for the progression of endometrial lesions as a baseline study for an eventual assessment of chemopreventive intervention efficacy. STUDY DESIGN: Tissue sections from normal endometrium at the proliferative and secretory phase, simple hyperplasia, atypical hyperplasia from cases free of concomitant adenocarcinoma and adenocarcinoma of the endometrium were recorded at high spatial resolution. Six cases from each diagnostic category were chosen as "typical," and 60 epithelial nuclei were randomly selected for measurement for each case. Discriminant analyses were carried out to derive a direction of progressive change in feature space and to correct the progression curve for the presence of cells not expressing progressive change among the random sample of nuclei. RESULTS: A well-conditioned progression curve was derived based on the mean discriminant function scores for each diagnostic category and the mean nuclear abnormality of the nuclei in each category, as expressed by their deviation in feature values from normal reference nuclei. The lesion signatures showed a clear trend toward extension into the range of higher nuclear abnormalities with increasing progression. There was an indication that abnormal endometrial lesions may comprise cases with distinctly different degrees of nuclear abnormality. CONCLUSION: A numeric assessment of lesion progression for endometrial lesions, based on karyometric measurements, is possible. The data suggest that additional analysis may provide further characterizing information for individual lesions.     

Mesothelioma Symposium 11.30–12.30 Tuesday 16 September 2003. Cytopathology of malignant mesothelioma

The diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma on the cytology of serous effusions is a two‐phase process. First is to determine that the effusion is malignant based on morphological features such as a highly cellular fluid with many large three dimensional cell aggregates, and/or the recognition of minor malignant criteria including prominent cell engulfment, uniformly present very prominent nucleoli, or the finding of very large (giant) cells. In cell block sections, strong positive staining with EMA often with cell membrane accentuation provides compelling support for a cytological diagnosis of malignancy. Second is to recognize that the malignant cells have a mesothelial phenotype and do not represent metastatic malignancy (usually adenocarcinoma). Criteria in support of mesothelioma include the lack of a ‘two cell’ population, that is one native (mesothelial) and one foreign (metastatic), cells with abundant dense staining cytoplasm, the presence of ‘windows’ where mesothelioma cells lie in close apposition and intracytoplasmic glycogen presenting either as small peripheral vacuoles on MGG stained smears or large yellow refractile crescents on Papanicolaou stained smears. In addition, mesothliomas often possess connective tissue stromal cores occurring as either well‐formed collagen within papillary aggregates or lying free as pink (MGG) or light green (Pap) amorphous material in the background of the smear or in loose association with mesothelioma cells. Finally small orange staining squamous‐like cells can occasionally be identified and sometimes this may be a very prominent finding and has resulted in the false impression of a squamous cell carcinoma. Almost certainly these cells represent apoptotic tumour cells. The connective tissue mucin hyaluronic acid may be found as a net‐like pattern in the smear background or as large hard‐edged magenta‐stained vacuoles on MGG‐stained smears. Cell block sections provide architectural information and it is usually possible to separate mesothelioma aggregates with their cuboidal cells, central nuclei and abundant dense cytoplasm arranged in solid, papillary or hollow clusters from those of adenocarcinoma with less dense, often foamy cytoplasm, often composed of columnar cells with elongated nuclei. Aggregate form in adenocarcinoma can be variable but true acini are a rare finding. These cell block sections provide an ideal medium for histochemistry (PAS with and without diastase digestion) and immunocytochemistry. By using a panel of antibodies (Calretinin and CK 5/6, BerEp4, CEA, B72.3) it is almost always possible to distinguish mesothelioma from metastatic adenocarcinoma. Calretinin and CK 5/6 positive staining and absent staining with BerEp4, CEA and B72.3 is considered diagnostic of mesothelioma.     

Well-differentiated papillary mesothelioma in the pelvic cavity. A case report

BACKGROUND: Well-differentiated papillary mesothelioma (WDPM) is considered to be a distinct subtype of peritoneal mesothelioma. It occurs in the peritoneum, is most commonly seen in young women and is found incidentally at laparotomy for other indications. Clinically, WDPM is considered to be benign or to have low malignancy potential. CASE: A 48-year-old female with no history of asbestos exposure presented with hypermenorrhea. An operation was performed for adenomyosis, and six papillary nodules, 2 cm or less, were found in the serosa of the pelvic cavity. Peritoneal lavage fluid and imprint material from the tumor were obtained for cytologic examination. The cytologic specimens showed many scattered cells and sheetlike clusters and some papillary clusters. These cells had abundant, polygonal, cyanophilic cytoplasm; clearly outlined borders; and slitlike intercellular spaces. The cell arrangement was orderly. The nuclei were uniform in size, with a single centrally located nucleolus, and there were no binucleated forms or mitosis. There was no increase in chromatin. On the luminal surface of the cells, a brush border was observed. CONCLUSION: It is important to differentiate WDPM from diffuse malignant mesothelioma or other peritoneal malignant tumors to avoid treating them as malignant tumors.     

The distinction of mesothelioma from adenocarcinoma in malignant effusions by electron microscopy

To determine the usefulness of the electron microscopic (EM) differential diagnosis between malignant mesothelioma and metastatic adenocarcinoma in cytologic specimens of serous fluids, we undertook a prospective study of 17 pleural and peritoneal effusions from 14 patients. In the nine effusions identified as malignant by routine cytologic examination, EM correctly diagnosed three mesotheliomas and six adenocarcinomas. EM resolved the differential diagnosis of mesothelioma versus adenocarcinoma in three cases in which routine cytologic examination could not. As with tissue specimens, EM cannot be used to diagnose the malignancy of cytologic specimens; it can, however, reliably identify the origin of cells diagnosed as malignant by routine cytologic examination. We conclude that, when EM is used to evaluate cytologically malignant effusions, it can accurately distinguish mesothelioma from adenocarcinoma. This technique will be diagnostically useful in selected cases and may be helpful in avoiding more invasive procedures as well as delays in diagnosis and therapy.     

Malignant mesothelioma. Cytopathology of 75 cases seen in a New Jersey community hospital

Seventy-five cases of diffuse pleural and/or peritoneal malignant mesothelioma (73 of body cavity fluids and 2 of fine needle aspirates) were studied by cytologic methods. Of the three major histologic varieties of mesothelioma (epithelioid, fibrous and mixed, or biphasic), the epithelioid and biphasic types were associated with four cytomorphologic features useful in the diagnostic evaluation: (1) the presence of abnormal cells, apparently mesothelial, (2) nuclei with subtle malignant features, (3) the presence of cells showing transitional forms from normal to abnormal in the same sample and (4) the presence of large tissue fragments. The fibrous mesotheliomas presented cytologically as sarcomatous neoplasms. Three histochemical reactions were found to be valuable adjuncts to diagnosis in the differentiation of the primary malignancies of the serous membranes from metastatic cancers. These stains were the periodic acid-Schiff, with and without diastase digestion, the Alcian blue, with and without hyaluronidase digestion, and the Van Gieson. The histochemistry was diagnostically useful in 42% of the cases in which the cytomorphologic impression was uncertain or equivocal; it served as an added confirmatory finding in 64% of the cytologically diagnosable mesotheliomas.     

A karyometric approach to the characterization of atypical endometrial hyperplasia with and without co-occurring adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVE: To develop a karyometric image analysis approach to distinguishing atypical endometrial hyperplasia with and without co-occurring adenocarcinoma. STUDY DESIGN: Six cases of atypical hyperplasia without and 6 cases with co-occurring adenocarcinoma, 4 cases of normal endometrium and 3 cases of adenocarcinoma were identified. From each case 100 nuclei were measured in representative diagnostic areas identified by an experienced pathologist. Discriminant analyses were performed. An unsupervised learning algorithm was applied to define and characterize different nuclear phenotypes, and those data were used to identify cases with co-occurring adenocarcinoma. RESULTS: Discriminant analysis showed that nuclei from atypical hyperplasia and atypical hyperplasia with co-occurring adenocarcinoma are statistically different. The unsupervised learning algorithm revealed differences in nuclear subpopulations that can be used to correctly identify an estimated 85% of individual cases. CONCLUSION: Nuclei from atypical hyperplasia without and with co-occurring adenocarcinoma have statistically different karyometric characteristics that may facilitate case classification.     

Quantitative ultrastructural study of nuclei from exfoliated benign and malignant mesothelial cells and metastatic adenocarcinoma cells

Various approaches, including morphometric image analysis, are currently being used to improve the distinction between diffuse mesothelioma and metastatic adenocarcinoma of the serous membranes. Since exfoliated cells of malignant mesotheliomas were thought to have nuclear profile contours with greater irregularity than the similar profiles in metastatic adenocarcinoma cells in pleural effusions, this and other nuclear parameters were measured in ultrastructurally examined preparations from three cases of reactive mesothelial hyperplasia, seven examples of diffuse mesothelioma and three cases of metastatic adenocarcinoma (with primaries in the ovary, esophagus and prostate). Contrary to the subjective impression, the nuclei in metastatic adenocarcinomas actually had a mean nuclear contour index greater than that found in diffuse mesotheliomas; statistically, the difference was not significant. Likewise, such other nuclear parameters as nuclear area, condensed chromatin area and contour index, percentage of condensed chromatin and number of condensed chromatin clumps per nuclear profile did not discriminate between malignant mesotheliomas and adenocarcinomas metastatic to pleural surfaces. These morphometric results quantitate the similarities in nuclear size, nuclear shape and condensed chromatin arrangement in these two types of tumor and explain why the cytopathologist has such great difficulty in distinguishing between exfoliated mesothelioma and adenocarcinoma cells in most cases.     

Significance of immunocytochemical expression of E-cadherin, N-cadherin and CD44 in serous effusions using liquid-based cytology

OBJECTIVE: To assess the diagnostic utility of E-cadherin (E-cad), N-cadherin (N-cad) and CD44 to discriminate adenocarcinoma cells from benign and malignant mesothelial cells in body cavity fluids and to clarify the origin of cancer cells. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 120 ThinPrep (Cytyc Corp., Boxborough, Massachusetts, U.S.A.) cytologic specimens of serous effusions, which included 22 cases of reactive mesothelium, 6 cases of malignant mesothelioma and 92 cases of metastatic adenocarcinoma from various sites, were immunostained for E-cad, N-cad and CD44. RESULTS: Eighty-three of 92 metastatic adenocarcinomas (90.21%) expressed E-cad, while 1 of 6 malignant mesotheliomas and 1 of 22 cases of reactive mesothelium were positive for E-cad. All 6 cases of mesothelioma expressed N-cad, whereas most cases of metastatic adenocarcinomas were negative. CD44 immunoreactivity was seen in 18 of 22 (81.81%) benign effusions and in 21 of 92 (22.82%) metastatic adenocarcinomas. CONCLUSION: The combination of E-cad, N-cad and CD44 appears to be a useful panel for distinguishing metastatic adenocarcinoma, mesothelioma and reactive mesothelium and also for clarifying the exact histogenetic origin of cancer cells. This is of great importance in a few otherwise-insoluble cases because of differences in tumor treatment and prognosis.     

The diagnostic and molecular characteristics of malignant mesothelioma and ovarian/peritoneal serous carcinoma

B. Davidson The diagnostic and molecular characteristics of malignant mesothelioma and ovarian/peritoneal serous carcinoma Malignant mesothelioma and ovarian/peritoneal serous carcinoma are two of the most common tumours affecting the serosal cavities. Unlike other malignant tumours diagnosed at this anatomical site, such as lung and breast carcinoma, malignant mesothelioma and serous carcinoma share a common histogenesis, may be difficult to differentiate morphologically, and co‐express many of the diagnostic markers used by cytopathologists in effusion diagnosis. Selected markers have nevertheless shown sufficient sensitivity and specificity to differentiate serous carcinoma from malignant mesothelioma effectively. Recently, our group applied high throughput technology to the identification of new markers that may aid in differentiating these two cancer types and validated several of these markers in follow‐up studies. This review will present current data regarding the diagnostic and biological aspects of malignant mesothelioma and ovarian/peritoneal serous carcinoma.     

Reactivity of six antibodies in effusions of mesothelioma, adenocarcinoma and mesotheliosis: stepwise logistic regression analysis

Anti‐CEA, anti‐vimentin, CAM5.2, BerEp4, Leu‐M1 and anti‐EMA were applied to effusions from 36 mesotheliomas, 53 adenocarcinomas and 24 reactive mesothelial proliferations. Stepwise logistic regression analysis selected three criteria of major importance for distinguishing between adenocarcinoma and mesothelioma: BerEp4, CEA and EMA accentuated at the cell membrane (mEMA), these three being of similar diagnostic value. The pattern BerEp4^?, CEA^? and mEMA⁺ was fully predictive for mesothelioma (sensitivity 47%), whereas the opposite pattern was fully predictive for adenocarcinoma (sensitivity 80%). Only EMA seemed to distinguish between mesotheliosis and mesothelioma. Comparison of reactivity in cytological and histological material from the same mesotheliomas showed similar staining frequencies for CEA and CAM5.2, with some random variation for Leu‐M1 and EMA, whereas vimentin and BerEp4 reactivity was more frequent in cytological specimens.     

Cytologic presentation of malignant mesothelioma in pleural effusions

1,601 pleural effusions were found to be malignant between 1976 and 1987. Among these were 26 (1.6% of the malignant effusions) mesothelioma. Only 2 cases showed pronounced cytologic features that made a definite diagnosis possible on cytologic criteria alone. In 20 cases diagnosis of mesothelioma was strongly suggested by the patient's history and cytology of the effusion was compatible with mesothelioma. In the other 4 cases special examinations (histo- and immunohistochemistry, electron microscopy) led to the final diagnosis. The cytologic features of mesothelioma and other examination techniques, needed to resolve the differential diagnosis of mesothelioma versus other neoplasm in pleural effusions, are discussed.