Kyra B Berg1, Andrew M Churg1,2, Simon Cheung2, Sanja Dacic3. 1. Department of Pathology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 2. Department of Pathology, Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 3. Department of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The separation of benign from malignant mesothelial proliferations on effusion cytology can be difficult. Loss of methylthioadenosine phosphorylase (MTAP) by immunohistochemistry is an established marker of malignancy in mesothelial proliferations, but to the authors' knowledge largely has been applied only to biopsies. The current study was conducted to determine the usefulness of MTAP immunohistochemistry in the diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma in effusion cytology specimens. METHODS: A total of 21 effusion cytology cases of malignant mesothelioma were stained for MTAP and BRCA-associated protein 1 (BAP1), with 15 reactive mesothelial cytology cases used as a control. Fourteen cases had a paired surgical specimen for comparison, and 7 cases were run for CDKN2A deletion by fluorescence in situ hybridization. RESULTS: Complete loss of MTAP cytoplasmic staining was noted in 7 of 21 effusion samples (33%), and no loss was observed in 11 effusion samples (52%); 11 of these cases had a matching surgical specimen and all 11 specimens demonstrated the same MTAP pattern. Partial loss was observed in 3 effusion specimens (80%, 40%, and 40% intact staining, respectively), but in all 3 the surgical specimen demonstrated 100% staining. None of the 15 reactive mesothelial cytology specimens demonstrated MTAP cytoplasmic loss. CDKN2A FISH demonstrated concordance in 5 of 7 cases (71%). MTAP immunohistochemistry had a sensitivity of 33% and a specificity of 100% for this differential diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: MTAP staining demonstrated generally good concordance between the cytologic and surgical specimens and appears to be useful in the diagnosis of mesothelioma on effusion specimens. Complete loss of MTAP is a reliable marker of malignancy, but the significance of partial loss of MTAP staining is unclear.
BACKGROUND: The separation of benign from malignant mesothelial proliferations on effusion cytology can be difficult. Loss of methylthioadenosine phosphorylase (MTAP) by immunohistochemistry is an established marker of malignancy in mesothelial proliferations, but to the authors' knowledge largely has been applied only to biopsies. The current study was conducted to determine the usefulness of MTAP immunohistochemistry in the diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma in effusion cytology specimens. METHODS: A total of 21 effusion cytology cases of malignant mesothelioma were stained for MTAP and BRCA-associated protein 1 (BAP1), with 15 reactive mesothelial cytology cases used as a control. Fourteen cases had a paired surgical specimen for comparison, and 7 cases were run for CDKN2A deletion by fluorescence in situ hybridization. RESULTS: Complete loss of MTAP cytoplasmic staining was noted in 7 of 21 effusion samples (33%), and no loss was observed in 11 effusion samples (52%); 11 of these cases had a matching surgical specimen and all 11 specimens demonstrated the same MTAP pattern. Partial loss was observed in 3 effusion specimens (80%, 40%, and 40% intact staining, respectively), but in all 3 the surgical specimen demonstrated 100% staining. None of the 15 reactive mesothelial cytology specimens demonstrated MTAP cytoplasmic loss. CDKN2A FISH demonstrated concordance in 5 of 7 cases (71%). MTAP immunohistochemistry had a sensitivity of 33% and a specificity of 100% for this differential diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: MTAP staining demonstrated generally good concordance between the cytologic and surgical specimens and appears to be useful in the diagnosis of mesothelioma on effusion specimens. Complete loss of MTAP is a reliable marker of malignancy, but the significance of partial loss of MTAP staining is unclear.
Authors: Yuen Yee Cheng; Man Lee Yuen; Emma M Rath; Ben Johnson; Ling Zhuang; Ta-Kun Yu; Vesna Aleksova; Anthony Linton; Steven Kao; Candice Julie Clarke; Brian C McCaughan; Ken Takahashi; Kenneth Lee Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2020-11-13 Impact factor: 6.244
Authors: Mounika Angirekula; Sindy Y Chang; Sarah M Jenkins; Patricia T Greipp; William R Sukov; Randolph S Marks; Kenneth R Olivier; Stephen D Cassivi; Anja C Roden Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-05-05 Impact factor: 6.575