Re-evaluation of histological diagnoses of malignant mesothelioma by immunohistochemistry

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In order to provide reliable tissue material for malignant mesothelioma (MM) studies, we re-evaluated biopsies and autopsy material from 61 patients with a diagnosis of MM from the period of 1980-2002.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Basic positive (Calretinin, EMA, Podoplanin, Mesothelin) and negative (CEA, Ber-Ep4) immunohistochemical (IHC) marker reactions were determined. If needed, more markers were used. Histological diagnoses were made by three pathologists. Survival data were calculated.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>49 cases (80%) were considered being MM by a high degree of likelihood, five more cases possible MM. Of the remaining seven cases, three were diagnosed as adenocarcinoma, three as pleomorphic lung carcinoma, in one peritoneal case a clear entity diagnosis could not be given. One of the possible MM cases and two of the lung carcinoma cases had this already as primary diagnoses, but were registered as MM.</p> <p>With a sensitivity of 100%, Calretinin and CEA were the most reliable single markers. The amount of MM cells with positive immunoreactivity (IR) for Podoplanin and Mesothelin showed most reliable inverse relation to the degree of atypia.</p> <p>In the confirmed MM cases, there had been applied either no IHC or between one and 18 markers.</p> <p>The cases not confirmed by us had either lacked IHC (n = 1), non-specific markers were used (n = 4), IR was different (n = 1), or specific markers had not shown positive IR in the right part of the tumour cells (n = 3).</p> <p>46 of the 49 confirmed and three of the not confirmed cases had been diagnosed by us as most likely MM before IHC was carried out.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In order to use archival tissue material with an earlier MM diagnosis for studies, histopathological re-evaluation is important. In possible sarcomatous MM cases without any positive IR for positive MM markers, radiology and clinical picture are essential parts of diagnostics. IHC based on a panel of two positive and two negative MM markers has to be adapted to the differential diagnostic needs in each single case. New diagnostic tools and techniques are desirable for cases where IHC and other established methods cannot provide a clear entity diagnosis, and in order to improve MM treatment.</p

Genome-Wide Profile of Pleural Mesothelioma versus Parietal and Visceral Pleura: The Emerging Gene Portrait of the Mesothelioma Phenotype

Malignant pleural mesothelioma is considered an almost incurable tumour with increasing incidence worldwide. It usually develops in the parietal pleura, from mesothelial lining or submesothelial cells, subsequently invading the visceral pleura. Chromosomal and genomic aberrations of mesothelioma are diverse and heterogenous. Genome-wide profiling of mesothelioma versus parietal and visceral normal pleural tissue could thus reveal novel genes and pathways explaining its aggressive phenotype.Well-characterised tissue from five mesothelioma patients and normal parietal and visceral pleural samples from six non-cancer patients were profiled by Affymetrix oligoarray of 38 500 genes. The lists of differentially expressed genes tested for overrepresentation in KEGG PATHWAYS (Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes) and GO (gene ontology) terms revealed large differences of expression between visceral and parietal pleura, and both tissues differed from mesothelioma. Cell growth and intrinsic resistance in tumour versus parietal pleura was reflected in highly overexpressed cell cycle, mitosis, replication, DNA repair and anti-apoptosis genes. Several genes of the “salvage pathway” that recycle nucleobases were overexpressed, among them TYMS, encoding thymidylate synthase, the main target of the antifolate drug pemetrexed that is active in mesothelioma. Circadian rhythm genes were expressed in favour of tumour growth. The local invasive, non-metastatic phenotype of mesothelioma, could partly be due to overexpression of the known metastasis suppressors NME1 and NME2. Down-regulation of several tumour suppressor genes could contribute to mesothelioma progression. Genes involved in cell communication were down-regulated, indicating that mesothelioma may shield itself from the immune system. Similarly, in non-cancer parietal versus visceral pleura signal transduction, soluble transporter and adhesion genes were down-regulated. This could represent a genetical platform of the parietal pleura propensity to develop mesothelioma.Genome-wide microarray approach using complex human tissue samples revealed novel expression patterns, reflecting some important features of mesothelioma biology that should be further explored

Baseline Serum Prostate-specific Antigen Value Predicts the Risk of Subsequent Prostate Cancer Death-Results from the Norwegian Prostate Cancer Consortium

BACKGROUND: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels in midlife are strongly associated with the long-term risk of lethal prostate cancer in cohorts not subject to screening. This is the first study evaluating the association between PSA levels drawn as part of routine medical care in the Norwegian population and prostate cancer incidence and mortality.OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between midlife PSA levels 8 million PSA results from >1 million Norwegian males ≥40 yr of age. We studied 176 099 men (predefined age strata: 40-54 and 55-69 yr) without a prior prostate cancer diagnosis who had a nonelevated baseline PSA level (<4.0 ng/ml) between January 1, 1995 and December 31, 2005.INTERVENTION: Baseline PSA.OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We assessed the 16-yr risk of prostate cancer mortality. We calculated the discrimination (C-index) between predefined PSA strata (<0.5, 0.5-0.9, 1.0-1.9, 2.0-2.9, and 3.0-3.9 ng/ml) and subsequent prostate cancer death. Survival curves were plotted using the Kaplan-Meier method.RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The median follow-up time of men who did not get prostate cancer was 17.9 yr. Overall, 84% of men had a baseline PSA level of <2.0 ng/ml and 1346 men died from prostate cancer, with 712 deaths (53%) occurring in the 16% of men with the highest baseline PSA of 2.0-3.9 ng/ml. Baseline PSA levels were associated with prostate cancer mortality (C-index 0.72 for both age groups, 40-54 and 55-69 yr). The fact that the reason for any given PSA measurement remains unknown represents a limitation.CONCLUSIONS: We replicated prior studies that baseline PSA at age 40-69 yr can be used to stratify a man's risk of dying from prostate cancer within the next 15-20 yr.PATIENT SUMMARY: A prostate-specific antigen level obtained as part of routine medical care is strongly associated with a man's risk of dying from prostate cancer in the next two decades

Excerpts from the 1st international NTNU symposium on current and future clinical biomarkers of cancer:innovation and implementation, June 16th and 17th 2016, Trondheim, Norway

The goal of biomarker research is to identify clinically valid markers. Despite decades of research there has been disappointingly few molecules or techniques that are in use today. The "1st International NTNU Symposium on Current and Future Clinical Biomarkers of Cancer: Innovation and Implementation", was held June 16th and 17th 2016, at the Knowledge Center of the St. Olavs Hospital in Trondheim, Norway, under the auspices of the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) and the HUNT biobank and research center. The Symposium attracted approximately 100 attendees and invited speakers from 12 countries and 4 continents. In this Symposium original research and overviews on diagnostic, predictive and prognostic cancer biomarkers in serum, plasma, urine, pleural fluid and tumor, circulating tumor cells and bioinformatics as well as how to implement biomarkers in clinical trials were presented. Senior researchers and young investigators presented, reviewed and vividly discussed important new developments in the field of clinical biomarkers of cancer, with the goal of accelerating biomarker research and implementation. The excerpts of this symposium aim to give a cutting-edge overview and insight on some highly important aspects of clinical cancer biomarkers to-date to connect molecular innovation with clinical implementation to eventually improve patient care