2020
DOI: 10.1111/pin.12973
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Genomic‐based ancillary assays offer improved diagnostic yield of effusion cytology with potential challenges in malignant pleural mesothelioma

Abstract: BRCA1‐associated protein 1 (BAP1) or methylthioadenosine phosphorylase (MTAP) immunohistochemistry (IHC) or 9p21 fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) are useful for the diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). However, the effect of these assays on the diagnostic yield of effusion cytology in MPM cases with suspicious cytomorphology or the diagnostic challenges in BAP1 or MTAP IHC have not been fully elucidated. Two cohorts of cytologic preparations obtained from pleural effusions were examined:… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
18
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
1
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Detection of CDKN2A deletion is important in routine practice as it effectively discriminates MPM from reactive mesothelial proliferations, and is associated with poor prognosis in MPM (3)(4)(5)(6). There are several approaches used to circumvent the false negative results in detecting chromosomal microdeletion, including use of smaller probes (as used in the present study), enhancement of FISH signals (13), multiple ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) assay (11) and array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) (10).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Detection of CDKN2A deletion is important in routine practice as it effectively discriminates MPM from reactive mesothelial proliferations, and is associated with poor prognosis in MPM (3)(4)(5)(6). There are several approaches used to circumvent the false negative results in detecting chromosomal microdeletion, including use of smaller probes (as used in the present study), enhancement of FISH signals (13), multiple ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) assay (11) and array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) (10).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, it is difficult to distinguish MPM from benign mesothelial proliferative disorders in routine practice due to overlaps in morphology (3). Thus, genomic-based ancillary assays, such as fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) to detect homozygous deletion (homo-d) of the 9p21 locus and immunohistochemistry (IHC) analysis to detect loss of BRCA1-associated protein 1 (BAP1) expression and methylthioadenosine phosphorylase [MTAP; the protein product of the MTAP gene located in the telomere side of cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A (CDKN2A) in the 9p21 locus (3)] proteins, are effective tools for detecting characteristic genetic abnormalities that are essential in the diagnosis of MPM (3,4).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We analyzed cell blocks prepared from pleural effusions obtained from patients with MPM or RMC from the pleural lesion files of the Department of Pathology, Fukuoka University Hospital, which includes consultation cases, between the years 2010 and 2019. RMCs were defined as a reactive proliferation of mesothelial cells in association with several underlying conditions, including infection, pneumothorax, trauma, cardiovascular disease, or lung cancer 22 . All patients completed a detailed medical evaluation and radiologic assessment before the diagnosis of MPM or RMCs.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nonmesothelial cells that were immunoreactive to BAP1 and MTAP (eg, inflammatory cells, including histiocytes and lymphocytes) served as internal positive controls in each staining protocol. BAP1 IHC revealed staining in the nucleus, and BAP1 loss in tumor cells was defined as complete nuclear loss 9,10,22 . Cytoplasmic reactivity to BAP1 was interpreted as a nonspecific reaction.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since then, more recent literature points toward high specificity for this marker, with highly variable sensitivity 43 . As reported by Churg et al, 43 several studies evaluating the performance of this ancillary test in cytology material all confirmed high specificity and variable sensitivity 47,66,67 . An unequivocal cutoff for HD definition has not been established 68 .…”
Section: Fish For P16 Homozygous Deletionmentioning
confidence: 97%