How useful is GLUT-1 in differentiating mesothelial hyperplasia and fibrosing pleuritis from epithelioid and sarcomatoid mesotheliomas? An international collaborative study.

OBJECTIVE: Mesothelial hyperplasia (MH) and fibrosing pleuritis (FP) can be difficult to distinguish from epithelioid (MM-E) and sarcomatoid (MM-S) malignant pleural mesotheliomas. GLUT-1 has shown variable results regarding its sensitivity and specificity when used to evaluate mesothelial proliferations. We evaluated the utility of GLUT-1 immunostaining in differentiating MH and FP from MM-E and MM-S.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, diagnostically well-characterized cases (MH=31, FP=29, MM-E=41, MM-S=29) were collected and manually stained for GLUT-1. All slides were visually scored by 2 pathologists; using the following system: 0%, 1+ 1-25%, 2+ 26-50% and 3+ >51% cells staining.

RESULTS: All benign cases (n=60) were negative for GLUT-1 while 45 of 78 (58%) MM [21 of 41 (50%) MM-E, 21 of 29 (72%) MM-S and 3 of 3 biphasic mesothelioma (100%)] had 1+ to 3+ staining. Of the MM-E, 10 had 1+, and 11 had 2+ staining; of the MM-S 3 had 1+, 15 had 2+ and 3 had 3+ staining. Both sarcomatoid and epithelioid components of the 3 biphasic mesotheliomas revealed 1+ staining. All 5 desmoplastic MM were negative.

CONCLUSIONS: Positive staining with GLUT-1 is helpful since it is present in half of MM-E and three-quarter of MM-S. Although all reactive mesothelial lesions were negative, the absence of immunoreactivity does not exclude the diagnosis of MM. As with all IHC stains used for diagnostic purposes, GLUT-1 has to be a part of a panel, and the results interpreted in the context of clinical, radiological and histological findings.