周曉明,馮學(xué)威,趙立
胸腔積液脫落細(xì)胞免疫組織化學(xué)染色檢測相關(guān)抗體對(duì)胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌和惡性胸膜間皮瘤的鑒別診斷價(jià)值
周曉明,馮學(xué)威,趙立
目的評(píng)估胸腔積液脫落細(xì)胞的波形蛋白(vimentin,VIM)、神經(jīng)特異度鈣結(jié)合蛋白(calretinin,CR)、細(xì)胞角蛋白7(CK7)、甲狀腺轉(zhuǎn)錄因子-1(thyroid transcription factor-1,TTF-1)免疫組織化學(xué)染色在胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌和惡性胸膜間皮瘤鑒別診斷中的價(jià)值。方法收集我科2009年9月—2011年10月經(jīng)胸腔積液細(xì)胞學(xué)診斷或胸膜活檢病理學(xué)證實(shí)的42例惡性胸膜間皮瘤(11例)和胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌(31例)患者納入分析。計(jì)算胸腔積液脫落細(xì)胞免疫組織化學(xué)染色中VIM、CR、CKT和TTF-1 4項(xiàng)指標(biāo)診斷胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌和惡性胸膜間皮瘤的靈敏度和特異度,評(píng)估4項(xiàng)指標(biāo)在鑒別診斷中的應(yīng)用價(jià)值。結(jié)果惡性胸膜間皮瘤患者的VIM、CR、CK7、TTF-1的陽性表達(dá)率與胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌患者比較,差異均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05)。VIM在惡性胸膜間皮瘤診斷中的靈敏度為91%(10/11),特異度為52%(16/31),陽性預(yù)測值為40.0%,陰性預(yù)測值為94.1%。CR在惡性胸膜間皮瘤診斷中的靈敏度為82%(9/11),特異度為84%(26/31),陽性預(yù)測值為62.9%,陰性預(yù)測值為92.9%。CK7在胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌診斷中的靈敏度為94%(29/31),特異度為82%(9/11),陽性預(yù)測值為81.8%,陰性預(yù)測值為76.3%。TTF-1在胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌診斷中的靈敏度為77%(24/31),特異度為91%(10/11),陽性預(yù)測值為96.0%,陰性預(yù)測值為58.8%。結(jié)論胸腔積液脫落細(xì)胞的VIM、CR、CKT和TTF-1免疫組織化學(xué)染色對(duì)惡性胸膜間皮瘤和胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌的鑒別診斷具有較高應(yīng)用價(jià)值。
惡性胸膜間皮瘤;肺腺癌;波形蛋白;神經(jīng)特異度鈣結(jié)合蛋白;細(xì)胞角蛋白7;甲狀腺轉(zhuǎn)錄因子-1
隨著惡性腫瘤發(fā)病率的增加,惡性胸腔積液(malignant pleural effusions,MPEs)已成為臨床面對(duì)的醫(yī)療問題之一。研究顯示15%的惡性腫瘤患者會(huì)伴發(fā)MPEs[1];另外,MPEs是大量胸腔積液患者的常見病因,占55%~59%[2]。在MPEs的病因中非小細(xì)胞肺癌是最常見的,而惡性胸膜間皮瘤也是常見病因之一[3],對(duì)MPEs的診斷和病理分型是臨床工作中的重要環(huán)節(jié)。脫落細(xì)胞的免疫組織化學(xué)染色有助于提高M(jìn)PEs的診斷率及確定病理分型[4-6]。臨床上惡性間皮瘤與腺癌胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移的鑒別比較困難,脫落細(xì)胞的免疫組織化學(xué)染色可能對(duì)二者的鑒別提供幫助。本研究通過比較確診的31例胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌和11例惡性胸膜間皮瘤患者的胸腔積液脫落細(xì)胞免疫組織化學(xué)染色結(jié)果,評(píng)估波形蛋白(vimentin,VIM)、神經(jīng)特異度鈣結(jié)合蛋白(calretinin,CR)、細(xì)胞角蛋白7(cytokeratin 7,CK7)、甲狀腺轉(zhuǎn)錄因子-1(thyroid transcription factor-1,TTF-1)在胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺和惡性間皮瘤鑒別診斷中的價(jià)值。
1.1 一般資料收集我科2009年9月—2011年10月收治的經(jīng)病理學(xué)證實(shí)的MPEs患者70例(胸腔積液細(xì)胞學(xué)診斷58例,胸膜活檢組織病理學(xué)診斷12例)。70例MPEs患者中胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌31例,其中男13例,女性18例;平均年齡(55.6±12.4)歲。惡性胸膜間皮瘤11例,其中男4例,女7例;平均年齡(59.9±11.7)歲。其余28例MPEs分別為腺鱗癌16例,乳腺癌5例,胃癌1例,宮頸癌1例,結(jié)腸癌1例,小細(xì)胞肺癌1例,胰腺癌1例,肺鱗癌1例,未分型1例。
1.2 方法
1.2.1 診斷方法病理診斷包括兩部分:首先所有患者進(jìn)行了胸腔積液脫落細(xì)胞學(xué)HE染色及脫落細(xì)胞的免疫組織化學(xué)染色(VIM、CR、CK7和TTF-1),然后由病理科醫(yī)生做出診斷;若細(xì)胞學(xué)不能確診且提示可能為MPEs的患者進(jìn)行胸膜活檢尋求病理診斷。根據(jù)本研究的目的,將胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌和惡性胸膜間皮瘤患者納入分析。免疫組織化學(xué)染色陽性結(jié)果的判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)如下,TTF-l:細(xì)胞核出現(xiàn)棕黃色為陽性細(xì)胞(見圖1);CK7:細(xì)胞膜呈棕黃色為陽性細(xì)胞(見圖2);VIM:細(xì)胞質(zhì)呈棕黃色為陽性細(xì)胞(見圖3),CR:細(xì)胞質(zhì)和細(xì)胞核呈棕黃色為陽性細(xì)胞(見圖4)。
圖1 腺癌細(xì)胞胞核TTF-1呈強(qiáng)陽性表達(dá)Figure 1 Obviously positive expressed TTF-1 in the nuclei of adenocarcinoma cells
圖2 腺癌細(xì)胞胞膜CK7呈強(qiáng)陽性表達(dá)Figure 2 Obviously positive expressed CK7 in the membrane of adenocarcinoma cells
圖3 間皮瘤細(xì)胞胞質(zhì)Vimentin強(qiáng)陽性表達(dá)Figure 3 Obviously positive expressed Vimentin in the cytoplasma of mesothelioma cells
圖4 間皮瘤細(xì)胞胞質(zhì)和胞核CR陽性表達(dá)Figure 4 Positive expressed CR in the cytoplasma and nuclei of mesothelioma cells
1.2.2 靈敏度和特異度計(jì)算方法比較單一抗體在診斷胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌和惡性胸膜間皮瘤的靈敏度和特異度,以病理診斷為金標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。將間皮細(xì)胞相關(guān)抗體(VIM、CR)在胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌中的陰性表達(dá)定義為真陰性,在胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌中的陽性表達(dá)定義為假陽性;在惡性胸膜間皮瘤中的陽性表達(dá)定義為真陽性,在惡性胸膜間皮瘤中的陰性表達(dá)定義為假陰性。將上皮細(xì)胞相關(guān)抗體(CK7、TTF-1)在惡性胸膜間皮瘤中的陰性表達(dá)定義為真陰性,在惡性胸膜間皮瘤中的陽性表達(dá)定義為假陽性;在胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌中的陽性表達(dá)定義為真陽性,在胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌中的陰性表達(dá)定義為假陰性。依據(jù)靈敏度=真陽/(真陽+假陰)×100%,特異度=真陰/(真陰+假陽)×100%,陽性預(yù)測值=真陽/(真陽+假陽)×100%,陰性預(yù)測值=真陰/(真陰+假陰)×100%進(jìn)行計(jì)算。
1.3 統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)方法采用SPSS 17.0軟件進(jìn)行分析,率的比較采用χ2檢驗(yàn),以P<0.05為差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義。
2.1 胸腔積液脫落細(xì)胞HE染色與免疫組織化學(xué)染色的診斷結(jié)果比較在確診的42例惡性胸膜間皮瘤和胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌中,胸腔積液脫落細(xì)胞HE染色的診斷結(jié)果為:腺癌5例,惡性間皮瘤2例,瘤細(xì)胞為16例,異型增生為19例。胸腔積液脫落細(xì)胞免疫組織化學(xué)染色的診斷結(jié)果為:腺癌24例,惡性間皮瘤8例,瘤細(xì)胞為3例,異型增生7例,兩種染色方法的診斷率間差異有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(83.3%和54.8%,χ2=8.02,P=0.005,見表1)。
表1 胸腔積液脫落細(xì)胞HE染色與免疫組織化學(xué)染色的診斷結(jié)果比較(例)Table 1 Comparison of the diagnostic yield of the HE staining and immunochemistry staining of the exfoliated cells of pleural effusion
2.2 間皮細(xì)胞相關(guān)抗體VIM、CR和上皮細(xì)胞相關(guān)抗體TTF-1和CK7在惡性胸膜間皮瘤和胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌中的表達(dá)惡性胸膜間皮瘤患者的VIM、CR、CK7、TTF-1的陽性表達(dá)率與胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌患者比較,差異均有統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)意義(P<0.05,見表2)。
表2 惡性胸膜間皮瘤患者與胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌患者各抗體的陽性表達(dá)率比較〔n(%)〕Table 2 Comparison of the positive immunochemistry related antibody expression in the pleural metastatic adenocarcinoma and malignant pleural mesothelioma
2.3 間皮相關(guān)抗體診斷惡性胸膜間皮瘤的靈敏度和特異度VIM診斷惡性胸膜間皮瘤的靈敏度為91%,特異度為52%,陽性預(yù)測值為40%,陰性預(yù)測值為94%。CR診斷惡性胸膜間皮瘤的靈敏度為82%,特異度為84%,陽性預(yù)測值為63%,陰性預(yù)測值為93%(見表3、4)。
表3 惡性胸腔積液患者VIM抗體檢測診斷結(jié)果與病理診斷結(jié)果的比較(例)Table 3 Comparison of the diagnostic yield of the VIM immunochemistry and the pathological examination in the malignant pleural effusion
表4 惡性胸腔積液患者CR抗體檢測診斷結(jié)果與病理診斷結(jié)果的比較(例)Table 4 Comparison of the diagnostic yield of the CR immunochemistry and the pathological examination in the malignant pleural effusion
2.4 上皮相關(guān)抗體診斷胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌的靈敏度和特異度CK7診斷胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌的靈敏度為94%(29/31),特異度為82%(9/11),陽性預(yù)測值為81.8%,陰性預(yù)測值為76.3%。TTF-1診斷胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌的靈敏度為77%(24/31),特異度為91%(10/11),陽性預(yù)測值為96.0%,陰性預(yù)測值為58.8%(見表5、6)。
表5 惡性胸腔積液患者CK7抗體檢測診斷結(jié)果與病理診斷結(jié)果的比較(例)Table 5 Comparison of the diagnostic yield of the CK7 immunochemistry and the pathological examination in the malignant pleural effusion
表6 惡性胸腔積液患者TTF-1抗體檢測診斷結(jié)果與病理診斷結(jié)果的比較(例)Table 6 Comparison of the diagnostic yield of the TTF-1 immunochemistry and the pathological examination in the malignant pleural effusion
MPEs及早明確診斷可使患者及早得到治療,改善其生存質(zhì)量。胸腔積液脫落細(xì)胞檢測是MPEs診斷的基礎(chǔ),盡管其陽性率僅在45%~60%[6],低于內(nèi)科胸腔鏡胸膜活檢的陽性率[7-8],但指南明確指出至少應(yīng)進(jìn)行兩次胸腔積液脫落細(xì)胞學(xué)檢查,如未能診斷建議行胸膜活檢[9],這主要是因?yàn)樾厍环e液脫落細(xì)胞學(xué)檢查創(chuàng)傷小,陽性率在可接受范圍。為了提高胸腔積液脫落細(xì)胞學(xué)檢查的靈敏度和特異度,臨床工作者做出了大量的努力,通過改進(jìn)細(xì)胞學(xué)檢測方法,如進(jìn)行免疫組織化學(xué)染色、胸腔積液中mRNA的PCR測定等,以求提高診斷的靈敏度和特異度。脫落細(xì)胞的免疫組織化學(xué)染色是目前最常用的手段之一,本研究結(jié)果顯示免疫組織化學(xué)染色的確定診斷率(83.3%)高于HE染色的確定診斷率(54.8%),說明它是脫落細(xì)胞HE染色檢查的重要補(bǔ)充。
在間皮細(xì)胞相關(guān)抗體中CR在正常間皮細(xì)胞與間皮瘤中均可表達(dá)。有研究顯示,CR診斷惡性上皮樣間皮瘤的靈敏度為92.0%~100.0%,在肺腺癌鑒別診斷中的特異度為91.3%~98.0%[10-11]。本研究中,CR在惡性胸膜間皮瘤中的陽性表達(dá)率明顯高于在胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌中的陽性表達(dá)率,其診斷惡性胸膜間皮瘤的靈敏度為82%,特異度為84%,陽性預(yù)測值為62.9%,陰性預(yù)測值為92.9%;CR表達(dá)陰性對(duì)除外惡性胸膜間皮瘤的診斷具有較高價(jià)值,而較好的靈敏度和特異度,使其可作為惡性胸膜間皮瘤的篩選指標(biāo)。VIM主要表達(dá)于間質(zhì)細(xì)胞及其來源的腫瘤細(xì)胞。惡性間皮瘤可表達(dá)VIM,尤其是肉瘤樣間皮瘤和分化差的雙相性間皮瘤,而在分化差的肺腺癌中也可有少量表達(dá)[12]。本研究中,VIM在惡性胸膜間皮瘤中的陽性表達(dá)率高于在胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌中的陽性表達(dá)率,其診斷惡性胸膜間皮瘤的靈敏度為91%,特異度為52%,VIM表達(dá)特異度較低可能與胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌分化較差有關(guān)。VIM同CR相似,具有較好的靈敏度和陰性預(yù)測值,可作為惡性胸膜間皮瘤的篩選指標(biāo)。
TTF-1在甲狀腺上皮、胎兒肺組織和成人Ⅱ型肺泡上皮中表達(dá),在肺腺癌及轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌診斷中具有重要作用[13],在除外甲狀腺癌的前提下可作為肺腺癌的特異性標(biāo)志物,有研究顯示其在肺腺癌中的表達(dá)率在80%,特異度達(dá)100%[14]。本研究中,TTF-1診斷轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌的靈敏度為(77%)較好,并且特異度高(91%),可作為診斷肺腺癌的特異性指標(biāo)之一。CK7常表達(dá)于卵巢、肺、乳腺的上皮細(xì)胞,本研究中其診斷轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌的靈敏度為94%,特異度為82%,高的靈敏度使其可作為胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌的重要篩查指標(biāo)。
需注意單一的免疫組織化學(xué)染色指標(biāo)均存在一定的不足,聯(lián)合檢測將使各指標(biāo)間進(jìn)行互補(bǔ),有利于提高診斷的靈敏度和特異度。因此,鑒于TTF-1、CK7、VIM和CR作為單一指標(biāo)鑒別惡性胸膜間皮瘤和胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌的良好表現(xiàn),對(duì)胸腔積液脫落細(xì)胞進(jìn)行上述4項(xiàng)指標(biāo)表達(dá)情況的聯(lián)合檢測,將在惡性胸膜間皮瘤與胸膜轉(zhuǎn)移性肺腺癌的鑒別診斷中具有很好的應(yīng)用價(jià)值。
1 Irani DR,Underwood RD,Johnson EH,et al.Malignant pleural effusions:a clinical cytopathologic study[J].Arch Intern Med,1987,147(6):1133-1136.
2 Alemán C,Sanchez L,Alegre J,et al.Differentiating between malignant and idiopathic pleural effusions:the value of diagnostic procedures[J].QJM,2007,100(6):351-359.
3 Porcel JM,Vives M.Etiology and pleural fluid characteristics of large and massive effusions[J].Chest,2003,124(3):978-983.
4 Ikeda K,Tate G,Suzuki T,et al.Comparison of immunocytochemical sensitivity between formalin-fixed and alcohol-fixed specimens reveals the diagnostic value of alcohol-fixed cytocentrifuged preparations in malignant effusion cytology[J].Am J Clin Pathol,2011,136(6):934-942.
5 Bagheri R,Haghi SZ,Rahim MB,et al.Malignant pleural mesothelioma:clinicopathologic and survival characteristic in a consecutive series of 40 patients[J].Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg,2011,17(2):130-136.
6 Renshaw AA,Dean BR,Antman KH,et al.The role of cytologic evaluation of pleural fluid in the diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma[J].Chest,1997,111(1):106-109.
7 Metintas M,Ak G,Dundar E,et al.Medical thoracoscopy vs CT scan-guided Abrams pleural needle biopsy for diagnosis of patients with pleural effusions:a randomized,controlled trial[J].Chest,2010,137(6):1362-1368.
8 Kolschmann S,Ballin A,Gillissen A.Clinical efficacy and safety of thoracoscopic talc pleurodesis in malignant pleural effusions[J].Chest,2005,128(3):1431-1435.
9 Maskell NA,Butland RJ.BTS guidelines for the investigation of a unilateral pleural effusion in adults[J].Thorax,2003,58(Suppl 2):ii8-ii17.
10 Ren S,Terman DS,Bohach G,et al.Intrapleural staphylococcal superantigen induces resolution of malignant pleural effusions and a survival benefit in non-small cell lung cancer[J].Chest,2004,126(5):1529-1539.
11 Kobayashi M,Takeuchi T,Ohtsuki Y.Establishment of three novel human malignant pleural mesothelioma cell lines:morphological and cytogenetical studies and EGFR mutation status[J].Anticancer Res,2008,28(1A):197-208.
12 Abutaily AS,Addis BJ,Roche WR.Immunohistochemistry in the distinction between malignant mesothelioma and pulmonary adenocarcinoma:a critical evaluation of new antibodies[J].J Clin Pathol,2002,55(9):662-668.
13 Moldvay J,Jackel M,Bogos K,et al.The role of TTF-1 in differentiating primary and metastatic lung adenocarcinomas[J].Pathol Oncol Res,2004,10(2):85-88.
14 王彩霞,王曉,呂淑慧,等.TTF-1、SP-A在肺腺癌診斷及鑒別診斷中的價(jià)值[J].臨床與實(shí)驗(yàn)病理學(xué)雜志,2008,24(3):280-283.
Value of Immunohistochemical Detection of Relevant Antibodies in the Exfoliated Cells of Pleural Effusion in the Differential Diagnosis of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma and Metastatic Pulmonary Adenocarcinoma
ZHOU Xiao-ming,F(xiàn)ENG Xue-wei,ZHAO Li.Department of Respiratory Medicine,the Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University,Shenyang 110004,China
ObjectiveTo assess the values of the immunochemistry staining of vimentin(VIM),calretinin(CR),cytokeratin7(CK7),and thyroid transcription factor-1(TTF-1)in the differential diagnosis of malignant pleural mesothelioma(MPM)and metastatic pulmonary adenocarcinoma(MPA).MethodsTotally 11 MPM patients and 31 MPA patients who were treated in our department from September 2009 to October 2011 were enrolled in this study.The levels of VIM,CR,CK7,and TTF-1 in the exfoliated cells of pleural effusion were determined using immunohistochemical method to evaluate their specificity and sensivitiy in the differential diagnosis of MPM and MPA.ResultsThe expressions of VIM,CR,CK,and TTF-1 showed significant differences between the MPM group and MPA group(P<0.05).The sensitivity,specificity,positive predictive value,and negative predictive value of VIM for the diagnosis of MPM were 91%,52%(16/31),40.0%,94.1%,respectively,and those of CR were 82%(9/11),84%(26/31),62.9%,92.9%respectively.The diagnosis sensitivity,specificity,positive predictive value,and negative predictive value of CK7 for the diagnosis of MPA were 94%(29/31),82%(9/11),81.8%,76.3%,respectively,and those of TTF-1 were 77%(24/31),91%(10/11),96.0%,and 58.8%,respectively.ConclusionThe immunohistochemistry of VIM,CR,CK7,and TTF-1 in the exfoliated cells of pleural effusion is valuable for the differential diagnosis of MPM and MPA.
Malignant pleural mesothelioma;Lung adenocarcinoma;Vimentin;Calretinin;Cytokeratin 7;Thyroid transcription factor-1
R 561.3
A
1007-9572(2012)12-4075-04
10.3969/j.issn.1007-9572.2012.12.047
110004遼寧省沈陽市,中國醫(yī)科大學(xué)附屬盛京醫(yī)院呼吸科
馮學(xué)威,110004遼寧省沈陽市,中國醫(yī)科大學(xué)附屬盛京醫(yī)院呼吸科;E-mail:xueweif@yahoo.com.cn
2012-05-20;
2012-11-13)
(本文編輯:王俊懿)