Journal of Kerman University of Medical Sciences

Using EMA and Calretinin on Cell Blocks for the Differentiation of Reactive Mesothelial Cells from Adenocarcinoma Cells in Pleural Effusions

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Massood Hosseinzadeh
Neda Soleimani
Maryam Mohammadnia Avval
Perikala Vijayananda Kumar
Navid Omidifar
Mansoureh Shokripour
Sahand Mohammadzadeh

Department of Pathology, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

https://doi.org/10.22062/jkmu.2022.92008
Abstract
Background: Effusion in body cavities can be considered as the presentation of malignancy or inflammatory conditions. Pleural fluid cytology is a popular diagnostic tool for the differentiation of adenocarcinoma cells (AC) from reactive mesothelial cells (RMC). However, there are many sources of controversies and errors in this technique that should be addressed.
Methods: This case-control study aimed to evaluate the use of immunohistochemistry markers, namely epithelial membrane antigen (EMA) and calretinin, on cell blocks to differentiate between RMC and AC in pleural effusions. Suspected malignant effusions were selected according to the clinical data and their equivocal cytological smears. A total of 80 samples corresponding to the fresh specimens sent from the Department of Internal Medicine to the Cytology Laboratory of Faghihi Hospital during Jan 2017-Feb 2018 comprised the case group. In addition, the control group entailed 80 non-malignant pleural samples with RMC.
Results: We observed that 74 (out of 80) effusion samples were strongly positive for EMA (92.5%). The sensitivity, specificity, and efficiency of the EMA marker were 92.5%, 95%, and 93.7%, respectively. The results of the calretinin assessment indicated 78 (out of 80) positive cases in the control group (97.5%). The sensitivity, specificity, and efficiency of calretinin staining were 97.5%, 98.7%, and 98.1%, respectively.
Conclusion: According to the results of the current study, EMA and calretinin are two reliable markers with acceptable accuracy in differentiating between RMC and AC.

Keywords

Adenocarcinoma
Calretinin
EMA
Pleural effusions
  1. Pereira TC, Saad RS, Liu Y, Silverman JF. The diagnosis of malignancy in effusion cytology: A pattern recognition approach. Adv Anat Pathol. 2006; 13(4):174-84. doi: 10.1097/00125480-200607000-00004.
  2. Sen R, Hasija S, Kalra R, Garg S, Singh A. Morphometric analysis and immunocytochemical staining on cytospin preparation in effusion cytology: A study. Journal of Cytology & Histology. 2015; 6(2):1. doi: 4172/2157-7099.1000314.
  3. Nautiyal N, Bhardwaj A, Acharya S, Kishore S, Kudesia S. Diagnostic Utility of Epithelial Membrane Antigen (EMA) and Calretinin (CAL) in Effusion Cytology. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017; 11(5):36-9. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2017/24339.9888.
  4. Fetsch PA, Abati A. Immunocytochemistry in effusion cytology: A contemporary review. Cancer. 2001; 93(5):293-308. doi: 10.1002/cncr.9044.abs.
  5. Subbarayan D, Bhattacharya J, Rani P, Khuraijam B, Jain S. Use of Panel of Markers in Serous Effusion to Distinguish Reactive Mesothelial Cells from Adenocarcinoma. J Cytol. 2019; 36(1):28-31. doi: 10.4103/JOC.JOC_13_18.
  6. Bhanvadia VM, Agarwal NM, Chavda AD, Bhetariya BV. Myoepithelioma of soft tissue in the gluteal region: Diagnostic pitfall in cytology. Cytojournal. 2017;14.
  7. Su XY, Li GD, Liu WP, Xie B, Jiang YH. Cytological differential diagnosis among adenocarcinoma, epithelial mesothelioma, and reactive mesothelial cells in serous effusions by immunocytochemistry. Diagn Cytopathol. 2011; 39(12):900-8. doi: 10.1002/dc.21489.
  8. Arora R, Agarwal S, Mathur SR, Verma K, Iyer VK, Aron M. Utility of a limited panel of calretinin and Ber-EP4 immunocytochemistry on cytospin preparation of serous effusions: A cost-effective measure in resource-limited settings. Cytojournal. 2011; 8:14. doi: 10.4103/1742-6413.83233.
  9. Murugan P, Siddaraju N, Habeebullah S, Basu D. Immunohistochemical distinction between mesothelial and adenocarcinoma cells in serous effusions: a combination panel-based approach with a brief review of the literature. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 2009; 52(2):175-81. doi: 10.4103/0377-4929.48910.
  10. Thapar M, Mishra RK, Sharma A, Goyal V. Critical analysis of cellblock versus smear examination in effusions. J Cytol 2009;26(2):60-64.
  11. Udasimath S, Arakeril SU, Karigowdar MH, Yelikar BR. The Role of the Cell Block Method in the Diagnosis of Malignant Ascitic Fluid Effusions. Journal of Clinical & Diagnostic Research. 2012 Sep 1;6(7).
  12. Murugan P, Siddaraju N, Habeebullah S, Basu D. Immunohistochemical distinction between mesothelial and adenocarcinoma cells in serous effusions: a combination panel-based approach with a brief review of the literature. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 2009; 52(2):175-81. doi: 10.4103/0377-4929.48910.
  13. Yahya ZM, Ali HH, Hussein HG. Evaluation of the sensitivity and specificity of immunohistochemical markers in the differential diagnosis of effusion cytology. Oman Med J. 2013; 28(6):‌410-6.  doi: 10.5001/omj.2013.117.
  14. Matsuda M, Ninomiya H, Wakejima R, Inamura K, Okumura S, Mun M, et al. Calretinin-expressing lung adenocarcinoma: Distinct characteristics of advanced stages, smoker-type features, and rare expression of other mesothelial markers are useful to differentiate epithelioid mesothelioma. Pathol Res Pract. 2020; 216(3):152817. doi: 10.1016/j.prp.2020.152817.
  15. Saleh HA, El-Fakharany M, Makki H, Kadhim A, Masood S. Differentiating reactive mesothelial cells from metastatic adenocarcinoma in serous effusions: The utility of immunocytochemical panel in the differential diagnosis. Diagn Cytopathol. 2009; 37(5):324-32. doi: 10.1002/dc.21006.
  16. Kim JH, Kim GE, Choi YD, Lee JS, Lee JH, Nam JH, et al. Immunocytochemical panel for distinguishing between adenocarcinomas and reactive mesothelial cells in effusion cell blocks. Diagn Cytopathol. 2009; 37(4):258-61. doi: 10.1002/dc.20986.
  17. Politi E, Kandaraki C, Apostolopoulou C, Kyritsi T, Koutselini H. Immunocytochemical panel for distinguishing between carcinoma and reactive mesothelial cells in body cavity fluids. Diagn Cytopathol. 2005; 32(3):151-5. doi: 10.1002/dc.20203.
  18. Lv M, Leng JH, Hao YY, Sun Y, Cha N, Wu GP. Expression and significance of MOC-31 and calretinin in pleural fluid of patients with lung cancer. Diagn Cytopathol. 2015; 43(7):527-31. doi: 10.1002/dc.23218.
  19. Subbarayan D, Bhattacharya J, Rani P, Khuraijam B, Jain S. Use of panel of markers in serous effusion to distinguish reactive mesothelial cells from adenocarcinoma. J Cytol. 2019; 36(1):28-31. doi: 10.4103/JOC.JOC_13_18.
  20. Khurram N, Anis T, Yusuf NW. Diagnostic Accuracy of a limited immuno-panel of calretinin and Ber-EP4 for diagnosis of malignant effusions. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2019; 29(1):33-6. doi: 10.29271/jcpsp.2019.01.33.
  21. Abusinna ES, Tabak SA, El-Esawy YF. Reliability of p-16, calretinin, and claudin-4 immunocytochemistry in diagnostic verification of effusion cytology. Egyptian Journal of Pathology. 2019; 39(1):228-38. doi: 10.4103/EGJP.EGJP_27_19.
  22. Kim NI, Kim GE, Lee JS. Diagnostic Usefulness of Claudin-3 and Claudin-4 for Immunocytochemical differentiation between Metastatic Adenocarcinoma Cells and Reactive Mesothelial Cells in Effusion Cell Blocks. Acta Cytol. 2016; 60(3):232-9. doi: 10.1159/000447008.
  23. Patel A, Borczuk AC, Siddiqui MT. Utility of Claudin-4 versus BerEP4 and B72.3 in pleural fluids with metastatic lung adenocarcinoma. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2020; 9(3):146-51. doi: 10.1016/j.jasc.2019.12.003.
  24. Dey S, Nag D, Nandi A, Bandyopadhyay R. Utility of cell block to detect malignancy in fluid cytology: Adjunct or necessity? J Cancer Res Ther. 2017; 13(3):425-9. doi: 10.4103/0973-1482.177501.

 

Journal of Kerman University of Medical Sciences
Volume 29, Issue 4
July and August 2022
Pages 333-340

Home

Editorial Board

Guide for Authors

Submit Manuscript

Guide for Reviewers

Contact Us