Francoise Galateau Salle1, Nolwenn Le Stang2, Franck Tirode3, Pierre Courtiol4, Andrew G Nicholson5, Ming-Sound Tsao6, Henry D Tazelaar7, Andrew Churg8, Sanja Dacic9, Victor Roggli10, Daniel Pissaloux11, Charles Maussion4, Matahi Moarii4, Mary Beth Beasley12, Hugues Begueret13, David B Chapel14, Marie Christine Copin15, Allen R Gibbs16, Sonja Klebe17, Sylvie Lantuejoul2, Kazuki Nabeshima18, Jean-Michel Vignaud19, Richard Attanoos16, Luka Brcic20, Frederique Capron21, Lucian R Chirieac22, Francesca Damiola2, Ruth Sequeiros2, Aurélie Cazes23, Diane Damotte24, Armelle Foulet25, Sophie Giusiano-Courcambeck26, Kenzo Hiroshima27, Veronique Hofman28, Aliya N Husain14, Keith Kerr29, Alberto Marchevsky30, Severine Paindavoine3, Jean Michel Picquenot31, Isabelle Rouquette32, Christine Sagan33, Jennifer Sauter34, Francoise Thivolet35, Marie Brevet35, Philippe Rouvier21, William D Travis34, Gaetane Planchard36, Birgit Weynand37, Thomas Clozel4, Gilles Wainrib4, Lynnette Fernandez-Cuesta38, Jean-Claude Pairon39, Valerie Rusch40, Nicolas Girard41. 1. MESOPATH, MESONAT, MESOBANK Department of BioPathology Centre Leon Berard, Lyon, France. Electronic address: francoise.galateau@lyon.unicancer.fr. 2. MESOPATH, MESONAT, MESOBANK Department of BioPathology Centre Leon Berard, Lyon, France. 3. University Claude Bernard Lyon, INSERM, CNRS, Research Cancer Center of Lyon, Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon, France. 4. OWKIN Paris, France. 5. Department of Histopathology, Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust and National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom. 6. University Health Network, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre and University of Toronto, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 7. Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona. 8. Columbia University and Department of Pathology Vancouver, Canada. 9. FISH and Developmental Laboratory at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 10. Duke University Medical Center, Department of Pathology, Durham, North Carolina. 11. Department of BioPathology-FISH Laboratory, Centre Leon Berard Lyon, France. 12. Mount-Sinai Medical Center, Department of Pathology, New York, New York. 13. CHU Bordeaux, Haut Leveque Hospital, Department of Pathology, Bordeaux, France. 14. University of Chicago, Department of Pathology, Chicago, Illinois. 15. University. Lille-CHU, Department of Pathology, Lille, France. 16. University of Wales, Department of Cellular Pathology, Cardiff, United Kingdom. 17. Department of Anatomical Pathology, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia. 18. Department of Pathology, Fukuoka University School of Medicine and Hospital, Fukuoka, Japan. 19. CHU Nancy, INSERM, University of Lorraine, Lorraine, France. 20. Department of Pathology, Graz, Austria. 21. CHU Pitié Salpétrière Paris, Department of Pathology, Paris, France. 22. Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts. 23. MESOPATH, MESONAT, MESOBANK Department of BioPathology Centre Leon Berard, Lyon, France; CHU Bichat Department of Pathology, University Paris VII, Paris, France. 24. MESOPATH, MESONAT, MESOBANK Department of BioPathology Centre Leon Berard, Lyon, France; CHU Cochin-Hotel Dieu, Department of Pathology, Paris, France. 25. MESOPATH, MESONAT, MESOBANK Department of BioPathology Centre Leon Berard, Lyon, France; CH Le Mans, Department of Pathology, Pays de la Loire, France. 26. MESOPATH, MESONAT, MESOBANK Department of BioPathology Centre Leon Berard, Lyon, France; CHU Hospital Nord, Marseille, University Aix-Marseille, Marseille, France. 27. Tokyo Women's Medical University, Department of Pathology, Tokyo, Japan. 28. MESOPATH, MESONAT, MESOBANK Department of BioPathology Centre Leon Berard, Lyon, France; Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona; CHU Nice, Department of Clinical and Experimental Pathology (LPCE), Nice, France. 29. Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Department of Pathology, Aberdeen, Scotland. 30. Scotland Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Department of Pathology, Los Angeles, California. 31. MESOPATH, MESONAT, MESOBANK Department of BioPathology Centre Leon Berard, Lyon, France; Department of Pathology, Henri Becquerel Centre, Rouen, France. 32. MESOPATH, MESONAT, MESOBANK Department of BioPathology Centre Leon Berard, Lyon, France; IUCT-Oncopôle, Department of Pathology, Toulouse, France. 33. MESOPATH, MESONAT, MESOBANK Department of BioPathology Centre Leon Berard, Lyon, France; CHU Nantes, INSERM, Thorax Institute, Hôpital Laënnec CHU Nantes, Nantes, France. 34. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Pathology, New York, New York. 35. MESOPATH, MESONAT, MESOBANK Department of BioPathology Centre Leon Berard, Lyon, France; Hospices Civils, East Hospital Group, Department of Pathology, Lyon, France. 36. MESOPATH, MESONAT, MESOBANK Department of BioPathology Centre Leon Berard, Lyon, France; Department of Pathology, CHU Caen, Caen, France. 37. UZ Leuven, Department of Pathology, Leuven, Belgium. 38. Genetic Cancer Susceptibility Group International Agency for Research on Cancer World Health Organization, Lyon, France. 39. INSERM, UPEC, Faculty of Medicine and CHI Creteil, Professional Pathologies and Environment Department, IST-PE, Creteil, France. 40. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Department of Thoracic Surgery, New York, New York. 41. Department of Thoracic Oncology Institute Curie Paris, France and European Reference Network EURACAN, Centre Leon Berard, France.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Histologic subtypes of malignant pleural mesothelioma are a major prognostic indicator and decision denominator for all therapeutic strategies. In an ambiguous case, a rare transitional mesothelioma (TM) pattern may be diagnosed by pathologists either as epithelioid mesothelioma (EM), biphasic mesothelioma (BM), or sarcomatoid mesothelioma (SM). This study aimed to better characterize the TM subtype from a histological, immunohistochemical, and molecular standpoint. Deep learning of pathologic slides was applied to this cohort. METHODS: A random selection of 49 representative digitalized sections from surgical biopsies of TM was reviewed by 16 panelists. We evaluated BAP1 expression and CDKN2A (p16) homozygous deletion. We conducted a comprehensive, integrated, transcriptomic analysis. An unsupervised deep learning algorithm was trained to classify tumors. RESULTS: The 16 panelists recorded 784 diagnoses on the 49 cases. Even though a Kappa value of 0.42 is moderate, the presence of a TM component was diagnosed in 51%. In 49% of the histological evaluation, the reviewers classified the lesion as EM in 53%, SM in 33%, or BM in 14%. Median survival was 6.7 months. Loss of BAP1 observed in 44% was less frequent in TM than in EM and BM. p16 homozygous deletion was higher in TM (73%), followed by BM (63%) and SM (46%). RNA sequencing unsupervised clustering analysis revealed that TM grouped together and were closer to SM than to EM. Deep learning analysis achieved 94% accuracy for TM identification. CONCLUSION: These results revealed that the TM pattern should be classified as non-EM or at minimum as a subgroup of the SM type.
INTRODUCTION: Histologic subtypes of malignant pleural mesothelioma are a major prognostic indicator and decision denominator for all therapeutic strategies. In an ambiguous case, a rare transitional mesothelioma (TM) pattern may be diagnosed by pathologists either as epithelioid mesothelioma (EM), biphasic mesothelioma (BM), or sarcomatoid mesothelioma (SM). This study aimed to better characterize the TM subtype from a histological, immunohistochemical, and molecular standpoint. Deep learning of pathologic slides was applied to this cohort. METHODS: A random selection of 49 representative digitalized sections from surgical biopsies of TM was reviewed by 16 panelists. We evaluated BAP1 expression and CDKN2A (p16) homozygous deletion. We conducted a comprehensive, integrated, transcriptomic analysis. An unsupervised deep learning algorithm was trained to classify tumors. RESULTS: The 16 panelists recorded 784 diagnoses on the 49 cases. Even though a Kappa value of 0.42 is moderate, the presence of a TM component was diagnosed in 51%. In 49% of the histological evaluation, the reviewers classified the lesion as EM in 53%, SM in 33%, or BM in 14%. Median survival was 6.7 months. Loss of BAP1 observed in 44% was less frequent in TM than in EM and BM. p16 homozygous deletion was higher in TM (73%), followed by BM (63%) and SM (46%). RNA sequencing unsupervised clustering analysis revealed that TM grouped together and were closer to SM than to EM. Deep learning analysis achieved 94% accuracy for TM identification. CONCLUSION: These results revealed that the TM pattern should be classified as non-EM or at minimum as a subgroup of the SM type.
Authors: Harry C Hwang; Shawna Pyott; Stephanie Rodriguez; Ashlie Cindric; April Carr; Carmen Michelsen; Kim Thompson; Christopher H Tse; Allen M Gown; Andrew Churg Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2016-05 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: Raphael Bueno; Eric W Stawiski; Leonard D Goldstein; Steffen Durinck; Assunta De Rienzo; Zora Modrusan; Florian Gnad; Thong T Nguyen; Bijay S Jaiswal; Lucian R Chirieac; Daniele Sciaranghella; Nhien Dao; Corinne E Gustafson; Kiara J Munir; Jason A Hackney; Amitabha Chaudhuri; Ravi Gupta; Joseph Guillory; Karen Toy; Connie Ha; Ying-Jiun Chen; Jeremy Stinson; Subhra Chaudhuri; Na Zhang; Thomas D Wu; David J Sugarbaker; Frederic J de Sauvage; William G Richards; Somasekar Seshagiri Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2016-02-29 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Pierre Courtiol; Charles Maussion; Françoise Galateau-Sallé; Gilles Wainrib; Thomas Clozel; Matahi Moarii; Elodie Pronier; Samuel Pilcer; Meriem Sefta; Pierre Manceron; Sylvain Toldo; Mikhail Zaslavskiy; Nolwenn Le Stang; Nicolas Girard; Olivier Elemento; Andrew G Nicholson; Jean-Yves Blay Journal: Nat Med Date: 2019-10-07 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: F Galateau Salle; N Le Stang; A G Nicholson; D Pissaloux; A Churg; S Klebe; V L Roggli; H D Tazelaar; J M Vignaud; R Attanoos; M B Beasley; H Begueret; F Capron; L Chirieac; M C Copin; S Dacic; C Danel; A Foulet-Roge; A Gibbs; S Giusiano-Courcambeck; K Hiroshima; V Hofman; A N Husain; K Kerr; A Marchevsky; K Nabeshima; J M Picquenot; I Rouquette; C Sagan; J L Sauter; F Thivolet; W D Travis; M S Tsao; B Weynand; F Damiola; A Scherpereel; J C Pairon; S Lantuejoul; V Rusch; N Girard Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2018-04-30 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Andreas Kleppe; Ole-Johan Skrede; Sepp De Raedt; Knut Liestøl; David J Kerr; Håvard E Danielsen Journal: Nat Rev Cancer Date: 2021-01-29 Impact factor: 60.716
Authors: David Michael Abbott; Chandra Bortolotto; Silvia Benvenuti; Andrea Lancia; Andrea Riccardo Filippi; Giulia Maria Stella Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2020-05-07 Impact factor: 6.639