Immunohistochemical differentiation of malignant mesothelioma, mesothelial hyperplasia and metastatic adenocarcinoma in serous effusions, utilizing staining for carcinoembryonic antigen, keratin and vimentin

The cytologic diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma and its distinction from mesothelial hyperplasia and metastatic adenocarcinoma is consistently difficult; tissue studies utilizing the immunohistochemical profiles of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and keratin have demonstrated a reproducible distinction between these tumors. Mesothelium contains vimentin in addition to keratin, but its characterization is hindered by its poor preservation in formalin fixatives; alcohol fixation is far superior. Alcohol-fixed, Papanicolaou-stained smears of serous fluids from five cases of reactive mesothelium, five metastatic adenocarcinomas and five malignant mesotheliomas were stained with polyclonal CEA, antikeratin monoclonals AE1 and AE3 (combined) and monoclonal vimentin utilizing the peroxidase-antiperoxidase method. The study revealed the excellent preservation of mesothelial vimentin staining in all three groups. The reactive mesothelium and mesothelioma groups were strongly positive for vimentin and keratin whereas the metastatic adenocarcinoma group was only positive for keratin and CEA (except one case). These findings support the results of previous tissue studies, disclosing CEA staining in the metastatic adenocarcinomas, but not in the mesotheliomas, and the inability of keratin staining to distinguish between the two. The findings also emphasize that positive vimentin staining will usually exclude a metastatic adenocarcinoma, but will not distinguish between neoplastic and reactive mesothelial states.     

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.     

Distinction between carcinoma cells and mesothelial cells in serous effusions. Usefulness of immunohistochemistry

The usefulness of an immunoperoxidase battery to distinguish carcinomatous from benign effusions was examined. Cell block sections from 90 previously diagnosed effusions were stained with antibodies to Leu-M1, B72.3, epithelial membrane antigen (EMA), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and vimentin. The 90 cases comprised 69 carcinomas (23 mammary, 16 ovarian, 10 pulmonary, 7 gastrointestinal [GI] and 13 others), 2 malignant mesotheliomas and 19 cases with reactive mesothelial cells only. EMA and vimentin were the most useful markers for distinguishing carcinoma cells from reactive mesothelial cells. EMA reacted with 86% of the carcinomas while vimentin reacted with 90% of the reactive cases. Leu-M1, B72.3 and CEA, although generally less sensitive than EMA, were also helpful in this regard. Additionally, the use of Leu-M1 and CEA together may help to distinguish pulmonary from GI carcinomas.     

Improved identification of malignant cells in serous effusions using a small, robust panel of antibodies on paraffin-embedded cell suspensions

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the expression of these markers individually and to find out which markers would be the most effective in a diagnostic panel to reliably discriminate these lesions. STUDY DESIGN: Sections from cell blocks of these fluids were stained with antibodies against calretinin, EMA, HMFG-2, BerEp4, B72.3 and CEA. A preliminary diagnosis was formulated based on cytomorphologic criteria. Subsequently, results of all 6 immunocytochemical stainings were evaluated, the most effective diagnostic pane of antibodies was proposed and staining results using this panel were compared to results obtained by solely cytomorphologic evaluation and to the ultimate diagnosis. RESULTS: Additional immunocytochemical staining with the proposed panel of calretinin, EMA, HMFG-2 and CEA improved sensitivity for malignancy in general from 78% to 96% and specificity from 73% to 91%. Sensitivity for malignant mesothelioma increased from 45% to 91%, with an increase in specificity from 87% to 96%. Sensitivity for adenocarcinoma decreased slightly from 100% to 92%, but specificity increased from 86% to 100%. Overall, diagnostic accuracy increased from 76% to 94%. CONCLUSION: Immunocytochemical staining of standardized cell block reparations of serous fluid cells with a small panel of 4 antibodies significantly improves diagnostic results compared to cytomorphologic evaluation alone.     

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.     

Malignant ascites of serous papillary ovarian adenocarcinoma. An immunocytochemical study of the tumor cells

In 17 malignant peritoneal effusions due to papillary serous adenocarcinoma of the ovary, the reaction patterns of the tumor cells to monoclonal antibodies (MAbs) against surface antigens were studied and compared with the reaction patterns of mesothelial cells in the same effusions. The following surface markers were used with the adhesive slide method: epithelial membrane antigen (EMA), human epithelium-specific cell surface antigen (HEA-125), human endothelial antigen (BMA-120), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA 3-13), an antibody against natural killer cells and cytotoxic cells (BMA-070), granulocyte antigen (Leu M1) and leukocyte antigen of class I (HLA-1). In all cases, from 30% to 95% of the tumor cells reacted with EMA and HEA-125. Tumor cells showed a positive staining with CEA 3-13 in only five cases. In all cases, from 75% to 95% of the tumor cells reacted positively with BMA-120. The reactivity of a few mesothelial cells with EMA and of all mesothelial cells with BMA-120 did not interfere with the identification of positive tumor cells since the reaction patterns were different. Interestingly, our study demonstrated that BMA-070, an MAb identifying natural killer cells and cytotoxic cells, is also a most useful tumor marker. The same was found to be true for Leu M1, an MAb originally thought to react only with granulocytes. The tumor cells showed a partial or total loss of the expression of HLA-1 reactivity. Since all cases were immunocytochemically positive for tumor cells while conventional cytology was positive in only 13 of the cases, the immunocytochemical analysis of malignant peritoneal effusions due to papillary serous adenocarcinoma of the ovary seems able to improve the cytologic diagnosis of the fluids.     

Immunofluorescent staining of metastatic carcinoma cells in serous fluid with carcinoembryonic antibody, epithelial membrane antibody, AUA-1 and BER-EP4

Using an indirect immunofluorescence technique, we assessed the accuracy and clinical usefulness of a panel of monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies. the panel consisted of carcinoembryonic antibody (CEA) and epithelial membrane antibody (EMA), AUA-1, and Ber-EP4 conjugated with fluorescein isothiocyanate. Twenty-six specimens from pleural, peritoneal or pericardial effusions known to contain carcinoma cells (adenocarcinoma or large cell anaplastic carcinoma) and 16 specimens without carcinoma were first examined. the sensitivity and specificity for each of the antibodies were as follows: CEA, 71% and 75%; EMA, 96% and 81%; AUA-1, 80% and 100%; and Ber-EP4, 85% and 100%, respectively. the panel of antibodies was then applied to a group of 14 'problematic' fluids. These had been identified as causing dilemmas in interpretation, either because the cells in the fluids were of equivocal appearance on light microscopy, or the cytological diagnosis was different from that expected in the light of the clinical condition of the patient. Insufficient cellular material was present in one specimen. In five (39%) of the cases the immunochemical staining supported the light microscopic diagnosis. In four (30%) cases, however, the results indicated that the original light microscopic report was incorrect. Two of these were examples of large cell carcinoma of the lung, in which false negative reports had been issued on pleural fluids. the other two were cases of benign ovarian tumours in which a false positive report had been issued. the immunostaining also clarified the final diagnosis in the three patients (23%) on whom 'suspicious' cytological reports had previously been issued. the remaining case, fluid from a patient with a high grade mixed Mullerian tumour of the ovary, was unresolved. We conclude that immunofluorescent staining by AUA-1, EMA and Ber-EP4 is an aid in the cytological interpretation of serous fluids. CEA is much less helpful.     

New approach to use ethidium bromide monoazide as an analytical tool

Aims: Ethidium bromide monoazide (EMA) has been determined to cause delay in DNA amplification from dead bacteria at real‐time PCR. However, there is concern that the increasing EMA concentration to suppress amplification from high number of dead bacteria also affects live bacteria. The aim is to disclose a novel application of EMA for food hygienic test. Methods and Results: We performed a low‐dose double EMA treatment. Live or heat‐dead Enterobacter sakazakii (reclassified as Cronobacter spp.) in 10% powdered infant formula (PIF) solution was subjected to a treatment with 20 μg ml^?1 of EMA followed by a treatment with 10 μg ml^?1 of EMA without washing, and direct real‐time PCR. We observed that DNA amplification from 10⁷ cells ml^?1 of dead Ent. sakazakii was completely suppressed within 50 cycles of PCR, whereas 10²–10³ cells ml^?1 of viable cells could be detected. When a 3‐h enrichment step in liquid medium was included after the first EMA treatment, live Ent. sakazakii could be detected at initial levels of 10⁰–10² cells ml^?1. We compared the low‐dose double‐treated EMA‐PCR with the culture method using 80 samples of PIF, and completely correlative results were obtained for both methods. Conclusions: We concluded that the newly developed low‐dose double‐treated EMA‐PCR is a very effective tool for live Ent. sakazakii detection in PIF. Significance and Impact of the Study: We focused on the specific nature of photoreactive compound that residual EMA is cancelled by irradiation. We were successful in treating bacteria with EMA in gradient concentration to increase live and dead distinction ability.     

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.     

TLR5 is a new reporter for triple‐negative breast cancer indicated by radioimmunoimaging and fluorescent staining

Triple‐negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a highly aggressive tumour that lacks marker for targeted diagnosis. Recently, it was reported that toll‐like receptor 5 (TLR5) was associated with some kind of tumours, especially in TNBC, but whether it could be used as a non‐invasive monitoring target is not fully understood. Here, we established TLR5^? 4T1 cell line with lentivirus‐shRNA‐TLR5 knock‐down transfection (with tag GFP, green fluorescent protein, TLR5^? 4T1) and control TLR5⁺ 4T1 cell line with negative control lentivirus transfection. The effect of TLR5 down‐regulation was detected with qPCR and Western blot. ¹²⁵I‐anti‐TLR5 mAb and control isotype ¹²⁵I‐IgG were prepared and injected to TLR5^+/? 4T1‐bearing mice models, respectively. Whole‐body phosphor‐autoradiography, fluorescence imaging and biodistribution were performed. Furthermore, ex vivo tumour TLR5 expression was proved through immunohistochemistry staining. We found that ¹²⁵I‐anti‐TLR5 mAb could bind to TLR5⁺ 4T1 with high affinity and specificity. Whole‐body phosphor‐autoradiography after ¹²⁵I‐anti‐TLR5 mAb injection showed TLR5⁺ 4T1 tumour images in 24 hours, more clearly in 48 hours. Radioactivities in tumour tissues were positively related with TLR5 expression. Biodistribution assay showed that ¹²⁵I‐anti‐TLR5 mAb was mainly metabolized through the liver and kidney, and ¹²⁵I‐anti‐TLR5 mAb was much more accumulated in TLR5⁺ 4T1 tumour than TLR5^? 4T1. In vivo fluorescence imaging successfully showed tumour tissues clearly both in TLR5⁺ and TLR5^? 4T1 mice compared with lentivirus untreated 4T1 tumour. Immunohistochemistry staining showed that TLR5 expression in tumours was indeed down‐regulated in TLR5^? 4T1 mice. Our results indicated that ¹²⁵I‐antiTLR5 mAb was an ideal agent for non‐invasive imaging of TLR5⁺ tumours; TLR5 may be as a novel molecular target for TNBC non‐invasive diagnosis.     

Pattern recognition of neuron specific enolase and carcinoembryonic antigen in whole blood samples

New tools and methods for pattern recognition of neuron specific enolase (NSE) and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) were proposed for the screening of whole blood samples. The new tools were based on stochastic sensors designed using nanoporous gold microspheres, graphite, graphene, diamond paste as well as α‐CDs, and 5,10,15,20‐tetraphenyl‐21H,23H‐porphyrin. The best sensor for the assay of CEA was the one based on P/graphite (the limit of determination was 16 fg/ml and sensitivity was 2.32 × 10⁷ s mg^?1 ml), while for the assay of NSE the, best sensor was the one based on P/graphene (the limit of determination was 7.45 pg/ml and sensitivity was 2.49 × 10⁸ s mg^?1 ml). The sensor of choice for simultaneous detection of NSE and CEA is the one based on P/graphene because we need high sensitivity and low limit of determination for NSE. To our knowledge, this is the only one screening test for early detection of lung cancer, by identification of NSE and CEA in whole blood samples. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Evaluation of Immunocytochemical Staining As A Method of Improving Diagnostic Accuracy In A Routine Cytopathology Laboratory

Immunocytochemical stains in a routine cytopathology laboratory can be used to distinguish between benign and malignant cells, and to identify tumour type. In our laboratory 30 problematic cases were selected for immunocytochemical stains and the results analysed in this paper. The following markers were used: cytokeratin (CAM5.2), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), kappa and lambda light chains, leucocytic common antigen (LCA), chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), prostate specific antigen (PSA), L26, UCHL1, S100-protein and vimentin. Twelve FNA (four lymph nodes, one parotid swelling, two from lungs, two from pleura and chest wall, one from lumbar region, two from soft tissue masses), and 18 effusions (12 pleural effusions, five ascitic fluids, one pericardial effusion) were investigated. We found immunocytochemical stains of value in formulating the cytological diagnosis in 11/12 of FNA and 15/18 of effusions.     

Development of a microtitre plate indirect ELISA for measuring cortisol in teleosts, and evaluation of stress responses in rainbow trout and gilthead sea bream

A microtitre plate indirect enzyme‐linked immunoassay (ELISA) was developed for measuring plasma cortisol levels in rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss, gilthead sea bream Sparus auratus sea bass Dicentrarchus labrax and Senegalese sole Solea senegalensis. Covalink microplates pretreated with disuccinimidyl suberate were coated with bovine serum albumin (BSA) conjugated to cortisol‐3‐carboxymethyl oxime. After blocking with BSA, competition was started by addition of plasma samples and anti‐cortisol antibody raised in rabbit. Goat anti‐rabbit IgG conjugated‐peroxidase was added as second antibody and then incubated with orthophenylenediamine as substrate. Reaction was stopped with 0·1 M HCl and absorbance was read at 450 nm in an automatic plate reader. The standard curve was linear from the lower limit of sensitivity of the assay (c. 0·3 ng ml^?1) to c. 3000 ng ml^?1. Dose‐response inhibition curves using serially diluted plasma samples of four species consistently showed parallelism with the standard curve using cortisol. The ELISA satisfied the strictest criteria of specificity (cross‐reactivity of anti‐cortisol antibody with testosterone, progesterone and 17ß‐oestradiol was negligible, cross‐reactivity with cortisone, corticosterone and 11‐deoxycortisol, was 1·5, 1 and 0·1%, respectively), reproducibility (interassay CV <6%), precision (intra‐assay CV <4%), and accuracy (average recovery >98%). Plasma cortisol concentration in rested fishes was in the range of 5–30 ng ml^?1. To physiologically validate the technique, changes in plasma cortisol concentrations were also measured in plasma of rainbow trout and gilthead sea bream following an acute 15 min chasing or 3 min air‐exposure stress, respectively. In both species plasma concentrations of cortisol, glucose and lactate rose significantly with respect to controls, showing concentrations similar to those reported previously for these species under similar stress conditions. Furthermore, gilthead sea bream chronically stressed by maintaining for 14 days under increased stocking density conditions also showed increased concentrations of plasma cortisol and glucose. These results validate the indirect ELISA technique developed for use in the evaluation of plasma cortisol concentration of at least four fish species.     

Rapid quantification of viable legionellae in water and biofilm using ethidium monoazide coupled with real‐time quantitative PCR

Aims: To optimize ethidium monoazide (EMA) coupled with real‐time quantitative PCR (qPCR) and to evaluate its environmental applicability on quantifying viable legionellae in water and biofilm of cooling towers and hot water systems. Methods and Results: EMA (0·9–45·5 μg ml^?1) and propidium monoazide (PMA, 0·9 and 2·3 μg ml^?1) combined with qPCR (i.e. EMA‐qPCR and PMA‐qPCR, respectively) were applied to unheated and heated (70°C for 30 min) Legionella pneumophila to quantify viable cells, which was also simultaneously determined by BacLight Bacterial Viability kit with epifluorogenic microscopic enumeration (BacLight‐EM). The effects of nontarget microflora and sample matrix on the performance of EMA‐qPCR were also evaluated. In comparison with BacLight‐EM results, qPCR with EMA at 2·3 μg ml^?1 was determined as the optimal EMA‐qPCR assay, which performed equally well as PMA‐qPCR for unheated Leg. pneumophila but better than PMA‐qPCR for heated Leg. pneumophila (P < 0·05). Moreover, qPCR with EMA at 2·3 μg ml^?1 accurately quantified viable Leg. pneumophila, Legionella anisa and Legionella‐like amoebal pathogens 6 (LLAP 6) without interferences by heated legionellae, unheated nonlegionellae cells and cooling tower water matrix (P > 0·05). As for water and biofilm samples collected from cooling towers and hot water systems, the viable legionellae counts determined by EMA‐qPCR were mostly greater than the culturable counts by culture assay but consistently lower than the total cell counts quantified by qPCR. Conclusions: The qPCR with EMA at 2·3 μg ml^?1 may accurately quantify viable legionellae (including fastidious LLAP 6) and Leg. pneumophila pretreated with superheating and is applicable for water and biofilm samples obtained from cooling towers and hot water systems. Significance and Impact of the Study: The EMA‐qPCR assay may be useful in environmental surveillance for viable legionellae and in evaluation of superheating efficacy against legionellae.     

Detection of viable Escherichia coli O157:H7 by ethidium monoazide real-time PCR

Aims: The aim of this study was to develop and optimize a novel method that combines ethidium bromide monoazide (EMA) staining with real‐time PCR for the detection of viable Escherichia  coli O157:H7 in ground beef. EMA can penetrate dead cells and bind to intracellular DNA, preventing its amplification via PCR. Methods and Results: Samples were stained with EMA for 5 min, iced for 1 min and exposed to bright visible light for 10 min prior to DNA extraction, to allow EMA binding of the DNA from dead cells. DNA was then extracted and amplified by TaqMan^® real‐time PCR to detect only viable E. coli O157:H7 cells. The primers and TaqMan^® probe used in this study target the uidA gene in E. coli O157:H7. An internal amplification control (IAC), consisting of 0·25 pg of plasmid pUC19, was added in each reaction to prevent the occurrence of false‐negative results. Results showed a reproducible application of this technique to detect viable cells in both broth culture and ground beef. EMA, at a final concentration of 10 μg ml^?1, was demonstrated to effectively bind DNA from 10⁸ CFU ml^?1 dead cells, and the optimized method could detect as low as 10⁴ CFU g^?1 of viable E. coli O157:H7 cells in ground beef without interference from 10⁸ CFU g^?1 of dead cells. Conclusions: EMA real‐time PCR with IAC can effectively separate dead cells from viable E. coli O157:H7 and prevent amplification of DNA in the dead cells. Significance and Impact of the Study: The EMA real‐time PCR has the potential to be a highly sensitive quantitative detection technique to assess the contamination of viable E. coli O157:H7 in ground beef and other meat or food products.     

Utility of HBME-1 immunostaining in serous effusions

Utility of HBME-1 immunostaining in serous effusions
HBME-1 is an anti-mesothelial cell monoclonal antibody derived from human mesothelioma cells. We investigated 227 body cavity effusions to test its utility in differentiating mesothelioma from adenocarcinoma. HBME-1 outlined cell membranes in non-neoplastic mesothelial cells. Thick surface staining was observed on all mesotheliomas. HBME-1 reactivity was also detected in 24% of metastatic carcinomatous effusions. Most ovarian carcinomas (83%) reacted with this antibody, showing surface staining. Cytoplasmic HBME-1 immunoreactivity was observed in a small proportion of non-ovarian adenocarcinomas (14%). Despite its limited specificity, HBME-1 might be added to the battery of other markers of epithelial and/or mesothelial differentiation to be used in cases of suspected mesothelioma. Evaluation of suspicious cells should include careful study of the pattern of immunostaining.     

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.     

Identification of Malignant Cells In Serous Effusions Using A Panel of Monoclonal Antibodies Ber-Ep4, Mca-B-12 and Ema

A panel of three monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs) was tested on 29 benign and 53 malignant effusions with the aim of investigating its usefulness for the discrimination between benign and malignant lesions. The panel consisted of MoAbs directed against epithelial membrane antigen (EMA); MCA-b-12, reacting with a 350 kD glycoprotein with mucin-like characteristics present on human breast cancer cells and various other normal and neoplastic tissues, and Ber-EP4, directed against a 34 and 39 kD glycopeptide on human epithelial cells but not on mesothelium. Fifty-two (98%) of the malignant effusions reacted with EMA, 49 (92%) with MCA-b-12 and 44 (83%) with Ber-EP4. Fourteen per cent of benign effusions reacted with EMA, 17% with MCA-b-12 and 7% with Ber-EP4. All seven effusions obtained from patients with a malignant mesothelioma reacted with EMA, six of the seven cases staining intensively. None of the seven stained with Ber-EP4. MCA-b-12 did not react with the cells in one case of malignant mesothelioma. The results suggest that the combination of EMA and Ber-EP4 may be used to discriminate between benign and malignant cells and possibly also between adenocarcinoma and malignant mesothelioma. MCA-b-12 followed in general the reaction pattern of EMA, although often with a less intense staining reaction, making this antibody unsuitable for inclusion in the panel.     

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.