Galateau-Sallé, Françoise

ABSTRACTThe 2021 WHO classification of thoracic tumours recommends grading pleural mesothelioma to aid prognostication. Robustness of grading and morphological characterisation is key to its clinical utility, though validation of this grading system has largely been conducted by expert thoracic pathologists. We conducted a survey inviting pathologists across a range of practices and expertise to grade digitised images of 50 epithelioid pleural mesotheliomas that had been graded by an expert in thoracic pathology. We included slides that were considered potentially problematic such as small biopsies, focal necrosis, and rare subtypes that may affect grading (small cell and deciduoid features). Using the Sectra Uniview web viewer, participants were asked to score atypia, mitotic count, and necrosis and choose from a list of cytological and architectural features. Seventy‐four pathologists anonymously participated. There was 90% agreement of consensus scores with expert opinion using the WHO 2‐tier grade and 72% for the 3‐tier nuclear grade but only 70% for nuclear atypia, 56% for mitoses, and 84% for necrosis. Both 3‐tier nuclear grade and WHO 2‐tier grading systems were significantly associated with survival. Our study affirms the overall robustness and utility of grading for pleural mesothelioma, reveals variances, and suggests the need for dedicated training.

Abstract Objectives Numerous studies on malignant mesothelioma (MM) highlight the prognostic importance of histologic subtype, nuclear grade, and necrosis. This study compares these parameters in paired biopsy and resection specimens of pleural MM. Methods Histologic subtype, percentage of epithelioid morphology, nuclear grade, and the presence or absence of necrosis were compared in 429 paired biopsies and resection specimens of pleural MM from 19 institutions. Results Histologic subtype was concordant in 81% of cases (κ = 0.58). When compared with resection specimens, epithelioid morphology at biopsy had a positive predictive value (PPV) of 78.9% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 93.5%; sarcomatoid morphology showed high PPV (92.9%) and NPV (99.3%), and biphasic morphology PPV was 89.7% and NPV was 79.7%. Agreement of the percentage of epithelioid morphology was fair (κ = 0.27). Nuclear grade and necrosis were concordant in 75% (κ = 0.59) and 81% (κ = 0.53) of cases, respectively. Nuclear grade showed moderate (κ = 0.53) and substantial (κ = 0.67) agreement from patients with and without neoadjuvant therapy, respectively, and necrosis showed moderate (κ = 0.47 and κ = 0.60) agreement, respectively, in the same subsets of paired specimens. Conclusions Paired biopsy-resection specimens from pleural MM show overall moderate agreement in pathologic parameters. These findings may help guide postbiopsy management and triage of patients with MM.

Abstract Context. —Malignant mesothelioma (MM) is an uncommon tumor that can be difficult to diagnose. Objective. —To develop practical guidelines for the pathologic diagnosis of MM. Data Sources. —A pathology panel was convened at the International Mesothelioma Interest Group biennial meeting (October 2006). Pathologists with an interest in the field also contributed after the meeting. Conclusions. —There was consensus opinion regarding (1) distinguishing benign from malignant mesothelial proliferations (both epithelioid and spindle cell lesions), (2) cytologic diagnosis of MM, (3) key histologic features of pleural and peritoneal MM, (4) use of histochemical and immunohistochemical stains in the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of MM, (5) differentiating epithelioid MM from various carcinomas (lung, breast, ovarian, and colonic adenocarcinomas and squamous cell and renal cell carcinomas), (6) diagnosis of sarcomatoid mesothelioma, (7) use of molecular markers in the differential diagnosis of MM, (8) electron microscopy in the diagnosis of MM, and (9) some caveats and pitfalls in the diagnosis of MM. Immunohistochemical panels are integral to the diagnosis of MM, but the exact makeup of panels used is dependent on the differential diagnosis and on the antibodies available in a given laboratory. Immunohistochemical panels should contain both positive and negative markers. The International Mesothelioma Interest Group recommends that markers have either sensitivity or specificity greater than 80% for the lesions in question. Interpretation of positivity generally should take into account the localization of the stain (eg, nuclear versus cytoplasmic) and the percentage of cells staining (>10% is suggested for cytoplasmic membranous markers). These guidelines are meant to be a practical reference for the pathologist.

Only 50% to 70% of patients with mesothelioma report asbestos exposure. Other exposures (eg, radiation) play a role in some cases, but some patients have no obvious cause. We describe a series of patients with long-standing indwelling intra-abdominal shunt catheters who developed malignant peritoneal mesothelioma, suggesting a novel association. We identified 7 patients who had shunts and subsequently developed mesothelioma (5 women; median age: 31 y, range: 18 to 45 y). Clinical history and pathology materials were reviewed, and RNA sequencing was performed. Clinical presentations varied; 6 patients had hydrocephalus and a ventriculoperitoneal shunt, and 1 patient had portal hypertension and a portoatrial shunt. The median duration of shunt therapy in 5 cases was 29 years (range: 12 to 35 y); the remaining 2 patients also had shunts for many years, but specific details were unavailable. Two patients had radiotherapy for malignancies in childhood. One had an alleged exposure to asbestos and 1 had prior exposure to talc. The rest had no known risk factors. Histologically, all tumors were purely epithelioid. Treatments included surgical debulking, chemotherapy, and palliative care. All 7 died of disease (median survival: 7 mo, range: 1 to 18 mo). Molecular testing showed loss of NF2 and CDKN2A/B and a BAP1 mutation in 1 case, and no genomic alterations associated with mesothelioma in 2 cases. Peritoneal mesothelioma may represent a complication of long-standing indwelling shunt catheters. The mechanism is unknown, but chronic peritoneal irritation may play a role. Albeit rare, mesothelioma should be considered in patients with a shunt who present with new ascites.

Abstract Mesothelioma affects mostly older individuals who have been occupationally exposed to asbestos. The global mesothelioma incidence and mortality rates are unknown, because data are not available from developing countries that continue to use large amounts of asbestos. The incidence rate of mesothelioma has decreased in Australia, the United States, and Western Europe, where the use of asbestos was banned or strictly regulated in the 1970s and 1980s, demonstrating the value of these preventive measures. However, in these same countries, the overall number of deaths from mesothelioma has not decreased as the size of the population and the percentage of old people have increased. Moreover, hotspots of mesothelioma may occur when carcinogenic fibers that are present in the environment are disturbed as rural areas are being developed. Novel immunohistochemical and molecular markers have improved the accuracy of diagnosis; however, about 14% (high‐resource countries) to 50% (developing countries) of mesothelioma diagnoses are incorrect, resulting in inadequate treatment and complicating epidemiological studies. The discovery that germline BRCA1‐asssociated protein 1 ( BAP1 ) mutations cause mesothelioma and other cancers (BAP1 cancer syndrome) elucidated some of the key pathogenic mechanisms, and treatments targeting these molecular mechanisms and/or modulating the immune response are being tested. The role of surgery in pleural mesothelioma is controversial as it is difficult to predict who will benefit from aggressive management, even when local therapies are added to existing or novel systemic treatments. Treatment outcomes are improving, however, for peritoneal mesothelioma. Multidisciplinary international collaboration will be necessary to improve prevention, early detection, and treatment.

Context .—Malignant mesothelioma (MM) is an uncommon tumor that can be difficult to diagnose. Objective .—To provide updated practical guidelines for the pathologic diagnosis of MM. Data Sources .—Pathologists involved in the International Mesothelioma Interest Group and others with an interest in the field contributed to this update. Reference material includes peer-reviewed publications and textbooks. Conclusions .—There was consensus opinion regarding (1) distinction of benign from malignant mesothelial proliferations (both epithelioid and spindle cell lesions), (2) cytologic diagnosis of MM, (3) key histologic features of pleural and peritoneal MM, (4) use of histochemical and immunohistochemical stains in the diagnosis and differential diagnosis of MM, (5) differentiation of epithelioid MM from various carcinomas (lung, breast, ovarian, and colonic adenocarcinomas, and squamous cell and renal cell carcinomas), (6) diagnosis of sarcomatoid mesothelioma, (7) use of molecular markers in the diagnosis of MM, (8) electron microscopy in the diagnosis of MM, and (9) some caveats and pitfalls in the diagnosis of MM. Immunohistochemical panels are integral to the diagnosis of MM, but the exact makeup of panels used is dependent on the differential diagnosis and on the antibodies available in a given laboratory. Immunohistochemical panels should contain both positive and negative markers. It is recommended that immunohistochemical markers have either sensitivity or specificity greater than 80% for the lesions in question. Interpretation of positivity generally should take into account the localization of the stain (eg, nuclear versus cytoplasmic) and the percentage of cells staining (>10% is suggested for cytoplasmic membranous markers). These guidelines are meant to be a practical reference for the pathologist.