Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 4, 2026

Generation and Expansion of Primary, Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma Tumor Lines
Published on: April 21, 2022
Pathologic Grading of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: An Evidence-Based Proposal
Giuseppe Pelosi1, Mauro Papotti2, Luisella Righi3
1Department of Oncology and Hemato-Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy; Inter-Hospital Pathology Division, Science and Technology Park, Institute for Research and Treatment Multimedica - IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Introduction:
A pathologic grading system (PGS) for malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) is warranted to better identify different risk categories of patients, plan therapeutic options, and activate clinical trials.
Methods:
A series of 940 patients with MPM (328 in a training set and 612 in a validation set) that was diagnosed between October 1980 and June 2015 at the participant institutions was retrospectively assembled. A PGS was constructed by attributing to each histologic parameter, independent at multivariate analysis with excellent reproducibility (κ > 0.75), different scores based on the increase in corresponding hazard ratios. The relevant PGS score thus ranged from 0 to 8 points for individual patients with MPM.
Conclusions:
The PGS was constructed by taking into consideration the histological subtyping of MPM (epithelioid/biphasic = 0 points; sarcomatoid = 2 points), necrosis (absent = 0 points versus present = 1 point), mitotic count per 1 mm2 (cutoffs as follows: 1-2 = 0 points, 3-5 = 1 point, 6-9 = 2 points, or ≥10 = 4 points), and Ki-67 labeling index based on 2000 cells (<30% = 0 points versus ≥30 = 1 point), all of which are independent factors in both patient sets after adjustment for stage and age at diagnosis. No heterogeneity was seen across the validation centers (p = 0.19). Epithelioid/biphasic MPM patterning and biopsy versus resection did not affect survival, whereas the PGS outperformed mitotic count and Ki-67 LI in both the training (area under the curve receiver operating characteristic = 0.76) and validation sets (area under the curve receiver operating characteristic = 0.73) (p < 0.01). Patient survival progressively deteriorated from a score of 0 (median times of 26.3 and 26.9 months) to a score 1 to 3 (median times of 12.8 and 14.4 months) and a score of 4 to 8 (median times of 3.7 and 7.7 months) in both sets of patients, with the hazard ratio for a 1-point increase in score being 1.46 (95% confidence interval: 1.36-1.56) in the training set and 1.28 (95% confidence interval: 1.22-1.34) in the validation set (after adjustment for age and [when available] tumor stage). The PGS was effective even in subgroup analysis (epithelioid, biphasic, and sarcomatoid tumors).
Discussion:
A simple and reproducible multiparametric PGS effectively predicted survival in patients with MPM.
More Related Videos
07:54Implantation and Monitoring by PET/CT of an Orthotopic Model of Human Pleural Mesothelioma in Athymic Mice
Published on: December 21, 2019
08:57Author Spotlight: Genetically Engineered Mouse Models and Pathological Characterization of Neurofibromatosis Type 1 Associated Tumors
Published on: May 17, 2024
Related Concept Videos
The Evidence for Evolution
Pleural Effusion I: Introduction
There are two main types of pleural effusion: transudative and exudative. They are differentiated using Light's...
Graded Potential
Graded potentials fall into two categories: depolarizing and hyperpolarizing. Depolarizing graded potentials typically occur when sodium (Na+) or...
Types of Aggregate Grading
Well-graded aggregates include a complete range of necessary size fractions that fit together to create a dense matrix with minimal voids, represented by a smooth, continuous gradation curve. This type of grading ensures good...
Pleural Disorders: Types and Brief Description
Pleural Effusion II: Symptoms and Management
A pleural effusion is the abnormal collection of fluid between the parietal and visceral pleura layers of tissue that form the lining of the lungs and chest cavity. It can occur independently or due to surrounding parenchymal diseases, such as infection, malignancy, or inflammatory conditions.
Clinical Manifestations: