Mesothelioma In Situ Mimicking Well-differentiated Papillary Mesothelial Tumor.

We have previously hypothesized that well-differentiated papillary mesothelial tumor (WDPMT) consists of 2 morphologically identical lesions, one of which is true WDPMT, while the other is a form of mesothelioma in situ. Here, we report 8 examples of the latter phenomenon, 3 with pleural disease (2 men/1 woman, ages 66 to 78 y); and 5 with peritoneal disease (all women, ages 31 to 81 y). At presentation the pleural cases all had effusions but no evidence of pleural tumor on imaging. Four of the 5 peritoneal cases had ascites as the initial finding and all 4 had nodular lesions that by imaging and/or direct inspection were thought to represent a diffuse peritoneal malignancy. The fifth peritoneal case presented with an umbilical mass. Microscopically, the pleural and peritoneal lesions looked like diffuse WDPMT, but all had lost BAP1. Occasional microscopic foci of superficial invasion were present in 3/3 pleural cases, while single nodules of invasive mesothelioma and/or occasional foci of superficial microscopic invasion were found in all of the peritoneal cases. The pleural tumor patients developed what clinically appeared to be invasive mesothelioma at 45, 69, and 94 months. Four/five peritoneal tumor patients underwent cytoreductive surgery and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Three with follow-up data are alive without recurrence at 6, 24, and 36 months; 1 patient refused treatment but is alive at 24 months. We conclude that mesothelioma in situ morphologically mimicking WDPMT is strongly associated with the synchronous or metachronous development of invasive mesothelioma, but that these lesions appear to progress very slowly.

A Combination of MTAP and p16 Immunohistochemistry Can Substitute for CDKN2A Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization in Diagnosis and Prognosis of Pleural Mesotheliomas.

CONTEXT.­: Homozygous deletion (HD) of CDKN2A is one of the most frequent genetic abnormalities in pleural mesotheliomas. HD of CDKN2A by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) is a reliable marker of malignancy in mesothelial proliferations; however, evaluation of CDKN2A deletion requires FISH. The 9p21 locus includes both CDKN2A and MTAP (methylthioadenosine phosphorylase); the latter is frequently codeleted with CDKN2A. OBJECTIVE.­: To examine the question of whether immunohistochemistry for MTAP and p16, the protein product of CDKN2A, can serve as a surrogate for CDKN2A HD by FISH. DESIGN.­: A random selection of 125 pleural mesothelioma cases was divided into 3 groups for evaluation of p16 and MTAP expression compared with FISH for CDKN2A deletion: 53 with HD, 39 with heterozygous deletion, and 33 without deletion. RESULTS.­: By itself, loss of p16 nuclear expression (<1% staining) showed a high sensitivity (96%) but low specificity (43%) for CDKN2A HD by FISH. MTAP cytoplasmic expression loss (≤30% staining) showed a 97% specificity and 69% sensitivity. The combination of p16 nuclear (<1% staining) and MTAP cytoplasmic (≤30% staining) loss demonstrated both high specificity (96%) and high sensitivity (86%). Patients with retained p16 expression (≥1%) had the best prognosis, whereas a p16 (<1%)/MTAP loss combination was associated with a dismal prognosis. CONCLUSIONS.­: MTAP immunohistochemical staining is a valid surrogate marker for CDKN2A HD by FISH; however, to obtain the same accuracy as the FISH assay, a combination of nuclear p16 and cytoplasmic MTAP staining is recommended. These findings correlate with prognosis.

Solid papillary mesothelial tumor.

We report nine examples of a previously undescribed type of peritoneal circumscribed nodular mesothelial tumor characterized by nests or sheets of mesothelial cells with sharp cell borders and extremely bland, sometimes grooved, nuclei. In some cases, nests were separated by fibrous bands. All patients were women, age range 30-72 years (median 52 years). All tumors were incidental findings during surgery and grossly were either solitary nodules or a few small nodules on the peritoneal surface. Referring pathologic diagnoses included diffuse malignant mesothelioma, localized malignant mesothelioma, well-differentiated papillary mesothelioma, and adenomatoid tumor. No tumor showed BAP1 loss by immunohistochemistry nor deletion of CDKN2A by FISH. RNA-seq revealed that these tumors clustered together and were distinct from peritoneal diffuse malignant mesotheliomas. Very few mutations or translocations were found, none of them recurrent from tumor to tumor, and no tumor showed an abnormality in any of the genes typically mutated/deleted in diffuse malignant mesothelioma. Array CGH on three cases revealed two with a completely flat profile and one with a small deletion at 3q26-3q28. On follow-up (range 5-60, median 34 months), there were no deaths, no recurrences, and no evidence of metastatic disease nor local spread; one case that initially had scattered nodules on the pelvic peritoneum had the same pattern of nodules at a second look operation 2 years later. We propose the name solid papillary mesothelial tumor for these lesions. These appear to be either benign or very low-grade tumors that need to be separated from malignant mesotheliomas.

Comprehensive Molecular and Pathologic Evaluation of Transitional Mesothelioma Assisted by Deep Learning Approach: A Multi-Institutional Study of the International Mesothelioma Panel from the MESOPATH Reference Center.

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.