Abstract

To provide practical guidelines for the cytopathologic diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma (MM). Cytopathologists involved in the International Mesothelioma Interest Group (IMIG) and the International Academy of Cytology (IAC), who have an interest in the field contributed to this update. Reference material includes peer-reviewed publications and textbooks. This article is the result of discussions during and after the IMIG 2012 conference in Boston, followed by thorough discussions during the 2013 IAC meeting in Paris. Additional contributions have been obtained from cytopathologists and scientists, who could not attend these meetings, with final discussions and input during the IMIG 2014 conference in cape town. During the previous IMIG biennial meetings, thorough discussions have resulted in published guidelines for the pathologic diagnosis of MM. However, previous recommendations have stated that the diagnosis of MM should be based on histological material only.[12] Accumulating evidence now indicates that the cytological diagnosis of MM supported by ancillary techniques is as reliable as that based on histopathology, although the sensitivity with cytology may be somewhat lower.[345] Recognizing that noninvasive diagnostic modalities benefit both the patient and the health system, future recommendations should include cytology as an accepted method for the diagnosis of this malignancy.[67] The article describes the consensus of opinions of the authors on how cytology together with ancillary testing can be used to establish a reliable diagnosis of MM.

Highlights

  • Data Sources: Cytopathologists with an interest in the field involved in the International Mesothelioma Interest Group (IMIG) and the International Academy of Cytology (IAC) contributed to this update

  • During the previous International Mesothelioma Interest Group (IMIG) biennial meetings thorough discussions have resulted in published guidelines for the pathologic diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma (MM)

  • The sensitivity of cytology for the diagnosis of mesothelioma may vary with the experience of cytopathologists, its accuracy is unquestioned when following these guidelines

Read more

Summary

Introduction

During the previous International Mesothelioma Interest Group (IMIG) biennial meetings thorough discussions have resulted in published guidelines for the pathologic diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma (MM). To demonstrate the mesothelial origin of a tumor cell population, it is recommended that two of the above antibodies in favor of MM and two excluding the diagnosis be used in a panel: EMA (membranous staining pattern) and calretinin, CEA and BerEp4 will show typical reactivity for MM (the first two positive and the second two negative) in most cases, and will exclude adenocarcinomas (the first two negative and the second two positive) [25]. The diagnosis is based on the same criteria as pleural and peritoneal MM, but pericardial fluids are often associated with inflammatory conditions, and here the challenge is to distinguish the MM from mesothelial reactive changes Malignancy must in these cases be established and verified with caution, using ICC, IHC and possibly other techniques, such as analysis of ploidy by FISH (see below).

Conclusions
Sheaff M
Findings
33 Davidson B
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call