Colby, Thomas V.

Abstract Background Despite advances in diagnosis and management, the interstitial lung disease (ILD) lexicon is plagued by ambiguous and inconsistent terminology that complicates communication and impedes knowledge generation. The objective of this Fleischner Society Consensus Statement was to produce standardized terminology for ILD multidisciplinary diagnoses and major phenotypes. Methods Interviews with 10 experts were used to identify ILD clinical diagnoses and major phenotypes. The preferred terms for each entity and potential alternatives were identified, alongside the rationale for the preferred term. Entities with more than one potential term were the subject of an online modified Delphi survey posed to the 29 committee members, aiming to achieve consensus. Committee members rated their agreement with the initially preferred term—5 (strongly agree), 4 (agree), 3 (neutral/unsure), 2 (disagree), and 1 (strongly disagree)—with the option to provide additional comments. Median score ≥4 and interquartile range ≤1 were considered consensus agreement. Terms not reaching agreement were discussed by video conference, followed by an additional survey that incorporated feedback. Results From the 60 initial terms, there were two root terms that required upfront consensus before survey initiation (ILD and interstitial pneumonia) and another eight terms that had no alternative suggested by the committee or in the literature. Agreement was met by 47/50 terms (94%) in Round 1 of the survey. The three terms (6%) that did not reach agreement met agreement in Round 2. Conclusions This document provides standardized recommended terms for ILD multidisciplinary diagnoses and major phenotypes that will facilitate communication among clinicians, researchers, patients, and other stakeholders.

Context.— Mesothelioma is an uncommon tumor that can be difficult to diagnose. Objective.— To provide updated, practical guidelines for the pathologic diagnosis of mesothelioma. Data Sources.— Pathologists involved in the International Mesothelioma Interest Group and others with expertise in mesothelioma contributed to this update. Reference material includes peer-reviewed publications and textbooks. Conclusions.— There was consensus opinion regarding guidelines for (1) histomorphologic diagnosis of mesothelial tumors, including distinction of epithelioid, biphasic, and sarcomatoid mesothelioma; recognition of morphologic variants and patterns; and recognition of common morphologic pitfalls; (2) molecular pathogenesis of mesothelioma; (3) application of immunohistochemical markers to establish mesothelial lineage and distinguish mesothelioma from common morphologic differentials; (4) application of ancillary studies to distinguish benign from malignant mesothelial proliferations, including BAP1 and MTAP immunostains; novel immunomarkers such as Merlin and p53; fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for homozygous deletion of CDKN2A; and novel molecular assays; (5) practical recommendations for routine reporting of mesothelioma, including grading epithelioid mesothelioma and other prognostic parameters; (6) diagnosis of mesothelioma in situ; (7) cytologic diagnosis of mesothelioma, including use of immunostains and molecular assays; and (8) features of nonmalignant peritoneal mesothelial lesions.

Context.— The pathologic diagnosis of usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) remains a challenging area, and application of histologic UIP guidelines has proved difficult. Objective.— To understand current practice approaches by pulmonary pathologists for the histologic diagnosis of UIP and other fibrotic interstitial lung diseases (ILDs). Design.— The Pulmonary Pathology Society (PPS) ILD Working Group developed and sent a 5-part survey on fibrotic ILD electronically to the PPS membership. Results.— One hundred sixty-one completed surveys were analyzed. Of the respondents, 89% reported using published histologic features in clinical guidelines for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) in their pathologic diagnosis; however, there was variability in reporting terminology, quantity and quality of histologic features, and the use of guideline categorization. Respondents were very likely to have access to pulmonary pathology colleagues (79%), pulmonologists (98%), and radiologists (94%) to discuss cases. Half of respondents reported they may alter their pathologic diagnosis based on additional clinical and radiologic history if it is pertinent. Airway-centered fibrosis, granulomas, and types of inflammatory infiltrates were considered important, but there was poor agreement on how these features are defined. Conclusions.— There is significant consensus among the PPS membership on the importance of histologic guidelines/features of UIP. There are unmet needs for (1) consensus and standardization of diagnostic terminology and incorporation of recommended histopathologic categories from the clinical IPF guidelines into pathology reports, (2) agreement on how to incorporate into the report relevant clinical and radiographic information, and (3) defining the quantity and quality of features needed to suggest alternative diagnoses.

Pulmonary minute meningothelial-like nodules (MMNs) are common incidental findings in surgical specimens, consisting of tiny proliferation (usually no larger than 5–6 mm) of bland-looking meningothelial cells showing a perivenular and interstitial distribution, sharing morphologic, ultrastructural, and immunohistochemical profiles with meningiomas. The identification of multiple bilateral MMNs leading to an interstitial lung disease characterized by diffuse and micronodular/miliariform patterns radiologically allows the diagnosis of diffuse pulmonary meningotheliomatosis (DPM). Nevertheless, the lung is the most common site of metastatic primary intracranial meningioma, and differential diagnosis with DPM may be impossible without clinic–radiologic integration. Herein, we report four cases (three females; mean age, 57.5 years) fitting the criteria of DPM, all incidentally discovered and histologically evidenced on transbronchial biopsy (2) and surgical resection (2). All cases showed immunohistochemical expression of epithelial membrane antigen (EMA), progesterone receptor, and CD56. Notably, three of these patients had a proven or radiologically suspected intracranial meningioma; in two cases, it was discovered before, and in one case, after the diagnosis of DPM. An extensive literature review (44 patients with DPM) revealed similar cases with imaging studies excluding intracranial meningioma in only 9% (4 of 44 cases studied). The diagnosis of DPM requires close correlation with the clinic–radiologic data since a subset of cases coexist with or follow a previously diagnosed intracranial meningioma and, thus, may represent incidental and indolent metastatic deposits of meningioma.

Bronchoalveolar lavage and lung biopsy (LBx) are helpful in patients with connective tissue diseases (CTD) and interstitial lung diseases (ILD) regardless of cause, including infectious, noninfectious, immunologic, or malignant. The decision whether to perform only bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL), and eventually a subsequent LBx in case of a nondiagnostic lavage, or one single bronchoscopy combining both sampling methods depends on the clinical suspicion, on patient’s characteristics (e.g. increased biopsy risk) and preferences, and on the resources and biopsy techniques available locally (e.g. regular forceps versus cryobiopsy). In CTD-ILD, BAL has major clinical utility in excluding infections and in the diagnosis of specific patterns of acute lung damage (e.g. alveolar hemorrhage, diffuse alveolar damage, and organizing pneumonia). LBx is indicated to exclude neoplasm or diagnose lymphoproliferative lung disorders that in CTD patients are more common than in the general population. Defining BAL cellularity and characterizing the CTD-ILD histopathologic pattern by LBx can be helpful in the differential diagnosis of cases without established CTD [e.g. ILD preceding full-blown CTD, interstitial pneumonia with autoimmune features (IPAF)], but the prognostic and theragnostic role of those findings remains unclear. Few studies in the pretranscriptomics era have investigated the diagnostic and prognostic role of BAL and LBx in CTD-ILD, and it is reasonable to hypothesize that future studies conducted applying innovative techniques on BAL and LBx might open new and unexpected avenues in pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment approach to CTD-ILD. This is particularly desirable now that a new drug treatment era is emerging, in which we have more than one therapeutic choice (immunosuppressive agents, antifibrotic drugs, and biological agents). We hope that future research will pave the path toward precision medicine providing data for a more accurate ILD-CTD endotyping that will guide the physicians through targeted therapeutic choices, rather than to the approximative approach ‘one drug fits them all’.

Background: Transbronchial lung forceps biopsy (TBLF) is of limited value for the diagnosis of interstitial lung disease (ILD). However, in cases with predominantly peribronchial pathology, such as sarcoidosis, TBLF is considered to be diagnostic in most cases. The present study examines whether transbronchial lung cryobiopsy (TBLC) is superior to TBLF in terms of diagnostic yield in cases of sarcoidosis. Methods: In this post hoc analysis of a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicentre study, 359 patients with ILD requiring diagnostic bronchoscopic tissue sampling were included. TBLF and TBLC were both used for each patient in a randomized order. Histological assessment was undertaken on each biopsy and determined whether sarcoid was a consideration. Results: A histological diagnosis of sarcoidosis was established in 17 of 272 cases for which histopathology was available. In 6 out of 17 patients, compatible findings were seen with both TBLC and TBLF. In 10 patients, where the diagnosis of sarcoidosis was confirmed by TBLC, TBLF did not provide a diagnosis. In one patient, TBLF but not TBLC confirmed the diagnosis of sarcoidosis. Conclusions: In this post hoc analysis, the histological diagnosis of sarcoidosis was made significantly more often by TBLC than by TBLF. As in other idiopathic interstitial pneumonias (IIPs), the use of TBLC should be considered when sarcoidosis is suspected.

Assessment of lung biopsies for the diagnosis of hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP) is one of the most difficult diagnostic problems for surgical pathologists. It is a form of interstitial lung disease resulting from an immune reaction provoked by an inhaled antigen in susceptible individuals. Although this definition sounds simple, in practice, the diagnosis of HP can be challenging. To address these issues, the American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST) has recently published a guideline for the diagnosis of HP. In this review, we will explore the multidisciplinary diagnostic evaluation of HP with a focus on the pathologic features as outlined in the CHEST guidelines. The histologic criteria are divided into 4 diagnostic categories: (1) Typical nonfibrotic HP or fibrotic HP; (2) Compatible with nonfibrotic HP or fibrotic HP; (3) Indeterminate for nonfibrotic or fibrotic HP; and (4) Alternative Diagnosis. It is important to emphasize that patterns 1 to 3 do not represent discrete histologic entities or pathologic diagnoses. Rather, these categories are meant to serve as a practical guide for organizing a complex set of overlapping histologic patterns into an integrated diagnostic framework for facilitating multidisciplinary discussion. High-resolution computed tomography features are also summarized, emphasizing how the correlation of lung biopsies with computed tomography findings can help to favor the diagnosis, particularly in cases where biopsies are not typical for HP. This review highlights details of the histologic spectrum of HP as well as the utility of different types of biopsies and bronchoalveolar lavage. We also emphasize the importance of multidisciplinary discussion and the complex differential diagnosis.