Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Reliably making the primary diagnosis of mesothelioma utilizing serous fluid cytology specimens: an institutional experience.
Jones, Terri E; Geisler, Daniel L; Baskota, Swikrity Upadhyay; Ohori, N Paul; Cuda, Jacqueline; Khader, Samer N.
Afiliación
  • Jones TE; Department of Pathology, Magee-Womens Hospital, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Electronic address: jonest12@upmc.edu.
  • Geisler DL; Department of Pathology, UPMC East, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Monroeville, Pennsylvania.
  • Baskota SU; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of California Davis Health System, Sacramento, California.
  • Ohori NP; Department of Pathology, Presbyterian-Shadyside Hospitals, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
  • Cuda J; Department of Pathology, Presbyterian-Shadyside Hospitals, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
  • Khader SN; Department of Pathology, Presbyterian-Shadyside Hospitals, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
J Am Soc Cytopathol ; 13(3): 174-182, 2024.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38514361
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

The diagnosis of mesothelioma has historically been challenging, especially on serous fluid cytology (SFC). Distinguishing between reactive and neoplastic mesothelial cells can be difficult on cytomorphology alone. However, additional ancillary tests, such as BRCA1 associated protein-1 immunohistochemistry and fluorescence in situ hybridization for cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A deletion, can provide a sensitive and highly specific method of proving malignancy. MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

SFC specimens diagnosed as mesothelioma, suspicious for mesothelioma (SM), and atypical mesothelial cells (AMCs) since 2012 were identified by querying the laboratory information system. Clinical data and pathologic parameters were gathered.

RESULTS:

One hundred ten cases of mesothelioma, SM, and AMC were identified. Of these, 61 cases had a definitive diagnosis of mesothelioma on SFC. Average age at SFC diagnosis was 67 years (26-87 years), with most patients being male (67%). Out of the 61 cases, 11 cases (18%) had an initial diagnosis of mesothelioma made on SFC specimens, with 5 of these 11 cases being in patients that never received a histologic diagnosis of mesothelioma. Ancillary studies were utilized in all 11 cases. An initial diagnosis of metastatic mesothelioma was made on SFC in 9 cases (15%). For 6 of these 9 cases, the SFC diagnosis was the sole diagnosis of metastatic mesothelioma without a companion histologic diagnosis. In addition, 15 cases were diagnosed as SM, with 11 of these cases following a definitive mesothelioma diagnosis. Thirty-four cases were diagnosed as AMC, with 27 cases following a definitive mesothelioma diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS:

The diagnosis of mesothelioma can be reliably made on SFC with the appropriate cytomorphology criteria and/or confirmatory ancillary testing.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Biomarcadores de Tumor / Citodiagnóstico / Mesotelioma Idioma: En Revista: J Am Soc Cytopathol Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Biomarcadores de Tumor / Citodiagnóstico / Mesotelioma Idioma: En Revista: J Am Soc Cytopathol Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article