Elsevier

Human Pathology

Volume 24, Issue 4, April 1993, Pages 347-354
Human Pathology

Original contribution
Multiple-marker immunohistochemical phenotypes distinguishing malignant pleural mesothelioma from pulmonary adenocarcinoma

https://doi.org/10.1016/0046-8177(93)90080-ZGet rights and content

Abstract

The diagnostic distinction between malignant pleural epithelial mesothelioma and pulmonary adenocarcinoma is often difficult and partially reliant on the use of immunohistochemistry (IHC). While there are several available IHC markers preferentially expressed in adenocarcinomas compared with mesotheliomas, there are no readily available or well-validated markers preferentially expressed in mesotheliomas and no markers are absolutely specific for either tumor. Thus, there always will be an element of doubt regarding the identity of lesions diagnosed by IHC using these markers and an undesirable reliance on negative results if the lesion is truly a mesothelioma. To help optimize the ability of currently available but imperfect markers to resolve adenocarcinoma and mesothelioma and to minimize the impact of false-negative results on their diagnosis, a systematic study was undertaken to identify multiple-marker immunostaining phenotypes that are the most specific and sensitive for each type of tumor. The study involved staining a series of malignant epithelial mesotheliomas (n = 34) and pulmonary adenocarcinomas (n = 103) with eight markers that were selected on the basis of previous reports of their relatively restricted specificities for one or the other of these lesions (and included carcinoembryonic antigen [CEA], tumor-associated glycoprotein 72 [B72.3], Leu-M1, vimentin, thrombomodulin, secretory component, carcinoma antigen-125, and periodic-acid-Schiff with diastase [for mucin]). Considering the markers one, two, and three at a time, all possible combinations of results were analyzed by computer to identify the phenotype most sensitive and specific for adenocarcinoma or mesothelioma. The best single marker was CEA (positive: 97% specific and sensitive for adenocarcinoma; negative: 97% specific and sensitive for mesothelioma). However, because examples of both tumor types expressed CEA, none of the study cases were unequivocally resolved and the risk of false-negative results was relatively high. The best two markers were CEA and B72.3 (both positive: 100% specific and 88% sensitive for adenocarcinoma; both negative: 99% specific and 97% sensitive for mesothelioma). The four possible combinations of results for these two markers resolved 68% of cases (93 of 137 cases), with less risk of false-negative results than a single marker. In general, several three-marker panels resulted in sensitivities and specificities similar to the two-marker panel of CEA and B72.3. In particular, the three-marker panel of CEA, B72.3, and Leu-M1 resulted in eight possible phenotypes that resolved 74% of cases (101 of 137 cases), with even further reduced risk of false-negative results. Until markers that are absolutely specific for adenocarcinoma or mesothelioma become available (and they may not even exist), nonspecific reagents and negative results will continue to be relied on to make a diagnosis of mesothelioma by IHC. The limited ability of currently available reagents to do this can be optimized by using multiple markers with systematically defined specificities and sensitivities.

References (40)

  • CA Szpak et al.

    The diagnostic distinction between malignant mesothelioma of the pleura and adenocarcinoma of the lung by a monoclonal antibody (B72.3)

    Am J Pathol

    (1986)
  • AK Gnosh et al.

    Immunohistological staining of reactive mesothelium, mesothelioma, and lung carcinoma with a panel of monoclonal antibodies

    J Clin Pathol

    (1987)
  • JG Lucas et al.

    Diagnostic histochemical and immunohistochemical studies in malignant mesothelioma

    J Surg Oncol

    (1987)
  • CN Otis et al.

    Immunohistochemical evaluation of pleural mesothelioma and pulmonary adenocarcinoma. A bi-institutional study of 47 cases

    Am J Surg Pathol

    (1987)
  • M Pfaltz et al.

    Immunohistochemistry in the diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma

    Virchows Arch A Pathol Anat Histopathol

    (1987)
  • H Popper et al.

    Immunohistochemical and histochemical markers of primary lung cancer, lung metastases, and pleural mesotheliomas

    Cancer Detect Prev

    (1987)
  • N Ordonez

    The immunohistochemical diagnosis of mesothelioma. Differentiation of mesothelioma and lung adenocarcinoma

    Am J Surg Pathol

    (1989)
  • PR Wirth et al.

    Immunohistochemical evaluation of seven monoclonal antibodies for differentiation of pleural mesothelioma from lung adenocarcinoma

    Cancer

    (1991)
  • RJ Marshall et al.

    Use of antibodies to carcinoembryonic antigen and human milk fat globule to distinguish carcinoma, mesothelioma, and reactive mesothelium

    J Clin Pathol

    (1984)
  • V Tron et al.

    Carcinoembryonic antigen and milk fat globule protein staining of malignant mesothelioma and adenocarcinoma of the lung

    Arch Pathol Lab Med

    (1987)
  • Cited by (0)

    Supported by NCI Cancer Center Support grant no. P30 CA54174.

    Presented at the annual meeting of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, 1991.

    View full text