Immunohistochemistry Does Not Reliably Distinguish Malignant From Benign Hyperplastic Mesothelial Cells
One interesting study is called, “Hyperplastic mesothelial cells in 
lymph nodes: Report of six cases of a benign process that can simulate 
metastatic involvement by mesothelioma or carcinoma” by Pedram Argani, 
MD, Juan Rosai, - Volume 29, Issue 4, Pages 339-346 (April 1998). Here 
is an excerpt: “Abstract - We report six cases of hyperplastic 
mesothelial cells located in the sinuses of lymph nodes.
All patients 
but one had a concurrent serosal fluid collection (two pericardial, two 
pleural, one abdominal) at the time of the lymph node biopsy. All 
effusions cleared with treatment of the underlying disorder, which 
included lymphoproliferative processes, congestive heart failure, and 
inflammatory diseases (Dressler syndrome, vasculitis, and 
glomerulonephritis).
Four cases were associated with vascular prominence
 of the involved nodal sinuses, a feature that may reflect the cause of 
the underlying effusion or support the transient persistence of benign 
mesothelial cells in lymph nodes. Two cases were characterized by 
distention of the nodal sinuses by sheets of mitotically active 
mesothelial cells. The differential diagnosis includes metastatic 
carcinoma, keratin-positive dendritic cells native to lymph nodes, and 
metastatic malignant mesothelioma.
Because the latter shares both 
clinical and morphological features with cases of benign mesothelial 
cells in lymph nodes, we believe that this distinction may not always be
 possible in a given biopsy specimen and therefore that careful clinical
 follow-up is required in such cases.”
Another interesting study is called, “Malignant mesothelioma : 
Immunohistochemistry and DNA ploidy analysis as methods to differentiate
 mesothelioma from benign reactive mesothelial cell proliferation and 
adenocarcinoma in pleural and peritoneal effusions” - 2, Allée du Parc 
de Brabois F-54514 Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy Cedex France. Here is an 
excerpt: “Abstract - Objective.-To determine whether malignant 
mesotheliomas can be differentiated from adenocarcinomas and benign 
reactive mesothelial cells in pleural and peritoneal fluids using 
immunohistochemical analysis in conjunction with DNA ploidy analysis. 
Design.-Sixteen cases of malignant mesothelioma, including epithelial, 
sarcomatous, and biphasic types, were collected. DNA analysis using flow
 cytometry and/or image analysis was performed on paraffin-embedded 
tissue from 15 of the mesothelioma cases, as well as on cytospin cell 
preparations from samples of pleural and peritoneal fluids from cases 
with either cytologically proven adenocarcinoma (seven cases) or benign 
reactive mesothelial cells (seven cases). Immunohistochemical studies 
were done in 15 mesotheliomas, 5 adenocarcinomas, and 4 benign reactive 
mesothelial cell effusions.
Results.-All malignant mesotheliomas tested 
(100%) stained positively for prekeratin, whereas stains for 
carcinoembryonic antigen, B72.3, Leu-M1, and Ber-EP4 were negative. 
Stains vimentin, epithelial membrane antigen, and CA125 were positive in
 75%, 75%, and 25% of cases tested, respectively. Benign reactive 
mesothelial cell cases stained similarly.
Adenocarcinomas were more 
likely to react positively with B72.3, Ber-EP4, and carcinoembryonic 
antigen, and negatively with vimentin. DNA analysis showed that all 
benign cases were diploid, while all adenocarcinomas were nondiploid. 
Fifty-three percent of the malignant mesotheliomas were nondiploid. 
Sensitivity for detection of nondiploidy was greater for image analysis 
than for flow cytometry (100% vs 75%). Conclusions.-B72.3, Ber-EP4, 
carcinoembryonic antigen, and vimentin are useful immunohistochemical 
markers in differentiating malignant mesotheliomas from adenocarcinomas,
 whereas immunohistochemistry does not reliably distinguish malignant 
from benign hyperplastic mesothelial cells. The addition of DNA ploidy 
studies is useful for differentiating the latter two groups.”
Another study is called, “Prognostic value of the serum tumour markers 
Cyfra 21-1 and tissue polypeptide antigen in malignant Mesothelioma” - 
Volume 25, Issue 1, Pages 25-32 (July 1999) - International Journal for 
Lung Cancer. Here is an excerpt: “Abstract - In malignant mesothelioma, 
survival is claimed to be related to age, duration of symptoms, 
performance status, histological subtype, stage and platelet count.
 However the exact prognostic value of these factors is still a matter of
 debate. We studied the two cytokeratin markers, Cyfra 21-1 and Tissue 
polypeptide antigen (TPA) for their significance in predicting survival 
retrospectively in 52 patients. Cyfra 21-1 and TPA were elevated in 26 
(50%) and 30 (58%) patients, respectively, and were highly correlated 
(r=0.98). Univariate analysis of data from 51 patients, showed a 
relation with survival for performance status (P=0.010), thoracic pain 
(P=0.014), platelet count (P=0.027), Cyfra 21-1 (P=0.002) and TPA 
(P=0.003). Multivariate analysis identified independent prognostic 
significance for performance status, platelet count and Cyfra 21-1.
In 
addition to performance status (80) the cytokeratin markers identified 
patients with good prognosis in a log rank test. Values of Cyfra 21-1 
and TPA are significantly correlated.
Home »
Mesothelioma
 , 
treatment
 » Immunohistochemistry Does Not Reliably Distinguish Malignant From Benign Hyperplastic Mesothelial Cells
Immunohistochemistry Does Not Reliably Distinguish Malignant From Benign Hyperplastic Mesothelial Cells
Labels:
Mesothelioma,
treatment

 
 
 
 
 
 
Post a Comment