The diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma (MPM) does not pose difficulties when presenting with usual clinico-radiologic features and morphology. Pathology textbooks and national/ international guidelines generally describe the findings of classic MPM, underlining common clinical presentation, the gold standard of sampling techniques, usual morphologic variants, immunohis-tochemical results of several positive and negative primary antibodies in the differential diagnosis, and the role of novel molecular markers. Nevertheless, MPM often does not follow the golden rules in routine practice, while the literature generally does not sufficiently emphasize unusual features of its manifestation. This gap may potentially create problems for patients in sustaining a difficult diagnosis of MPM in clinical practice and during legal disputes. Indeed, the guidelines accidentally tend to favor the job of lawyers and pathologists defending asbestos-producing industries against patients suffering from MPM characterized by uncommon features. The current review is aimed at underlining the wide spectrum of clinical and radiological presentation of MPM, the possibility to consistently use cytology for diagnostic intent, the aberrant immunohistochemical expression using so-called specific negative and positive primary antibodies, and finally proposing some alternative and more unbiased approaches to the diagnosis of MPM.

Rossi, G., Davoli, F., Poletti, V., Cavazza, A., Lococo, F., When the diagnosis of mesothelioma challenges textbooks and guidelines, <<JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE>>, 2021; 10 (11): 2434-2434. [doi:10.3390/jcm10112434] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/200810]

When the diagnosis of mesothelioma challenges textbooks and guidelines

Lococo, F.
2021

Abstract

The diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma (MPM) does not pose difficulties when presenting with usual clinico-radiologic features and morphology. Pathology textbooks and national/ international guidelines generally describe the findings of classic MPM, underlining common clinical presentation, the gold standard of sampling techniques, usual morphologic variants, immunohis-tochemical results of several positive and negative primary antibodies in the differential diagnosis, and the role of novel molecular markers. Nevertheless, MPM often does not follow the golden rules in routine practice, while the literature generally does not sufficiently emphasize unusual features of its manifestation. This gap may potentially create problems for patients in sustaining a difficult diagnosis of MPM in clinical practice and during legal disputes. Indeed, the guidelines accidentally tend to favor the job of lawyers and pathologists defending asbestos-producing industries against patients suffering from MPM characterized by uncommon features. The current review is aimed at underlining the wide spectrum of clinical and radiological presentation of MPM, the possibility to consistently use cytology for diagnostic intent, the aberrant immunohistochemical expression using so-called specific negative and positive primary antibodies, and finally proposing some alternative and more unbiased approaches to the diagnosis of MPM.
Inglese
Rossi, G., Davoli, F., Poletti, V., Cavazza, A., Lococo, F., When the diagnosis of mesothelioma challenges textbooks and guidelines, <<JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE>>, 2021; 10 (11): 2434-2434. [doi:10.3390/jcm10112434] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/200810]
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/10807/200810
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 6
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact