The role of pathologists in the diagnosis of occupational lung diseases: an expert opinion of the European Society of Pathology Pulmonary Pathology Working Group.

Occupational lung/thoracic diseases are a major global public health issue. They comprise a diverse spectrum of health conditions with complex pathology, most of which arise following chronic heavy workplace exposures to various mineral dusts, metal fumes, or following inhaled organic particulate reactions. Many occupational lung diseases could become irreversible; thus accurate diagnosis is mandatory to minimize dust exposure and consequently reduce damage to the respiratory system. Lung biopsy is usually required when exposure history is inconsistent with imaging, in case of unusual or new exposures, in case of unexpected malignancy, and in cases in which there are claims for personal injury and legal compensation. In this paper, we provide an overview of the most frequent occupational lung diseases with a focus on pathological diagnosis. This is a paper that summarizes the expert opinion from a group of European pathologists, together with contributions from other specialists who are crucial for the diagnosis and management of these diseases. Indeed, tight collaboration of all specialists involved in the workup is mandatory as many occupational lung diseases are misdiagnosed or go unrecognized. This document provides a guide for pathologists in practice to facilitate the accurate diagnosis of occupational lung disease. The review article reports relevant topics discussed during an educational course held by expert pathologists, active members of the Pulmonary Pathology Working Group of the European Society of Pathology. The course was endorsed by the University of Padova as a "winter school" (selected project in the call for "Shaping a World-class University" 2022).

Guidelines for Pathologic Diagnosis of Mesothelioma.

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.