Summary:
Mesotheliomas of the abdominal cavity are rare tumors that primarily involve the peritoneum, mesentery, and omentum. The involvement of the viscera is usually secondary to bulky and extensive serosal disease. We describe 7 cases of mesothelioma in which the initial manifestation was that of an ovarian mass. All patients underwent surgery with a primary diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Clinical histories, gross features, and histology slides were reviewed. Immunostains were performed on all cases and electron microscopy was performed in 2 cases. The patients ranged in age from 22 to 52 years and the lesions ranged in size from 3.8 to 9 cm. Of the 7 cases, 4 were predominantly cystic and 3 were solid. Histologically, all cystic tumors were multicystic mesothelioma, whereas the 3 solid tumors were diffuse malignant mesotheliomas. One patient had a borderline mucinous tumor with the mesothelioma occurring as a mural nodule, an association not described earlier. The oldest patient in this series had a diffuse malignant mesothelioma of the peritoneum with predominant ovarian surface involvement. Mesothelial neoplasms can present as ovarian masses in young women. Awareness of this presentation is important to establish appropriate management.
Keywords: Ovary, Mesothelioma, Mural nodule, Mucinous tumor
Mesotheliomas of the abdominal cavity are rare tumors that primarily involve the peritoneum, mesentery, and omentum, with an incidence of between 0.2 and 2 cases per million in women (1,2). The clinical presentation, diagnostic imaging, and operative findings of peritoneal mesothelioma are often similar to those of ovarian carcinomas. However, recent advances in management of mesotheliomas have improved outcomes in these patients (3–5), underscoring the importance of a precise diagnosis. Mesotheliomas have bulky serosal involvement with minimal visceral invasion (6), and a dominant ovarian mass is unusual. We describe 7 cases of mesothelioma in which the initial manifestation was that of an ovarian mass.
METHODS
We reviewed our files for patients who had been accepted for the consideration of treatment in ovarian cancer protocols, but were reclassified as having mesothelial neoplasms after pathology evaluation. Available clinical histories were obtained and histologic slides/blocks were retrieved. One consultation case had a single representative section (slide and block), whereas the other cases were represented by 10 to 62 (mean 33) slides. Immunostains were variably performed for cytokeratins (CK) (pancytokeratin AE1/AE3, CK5/6, CK7, and CK20), mesothelin, calretinin, HBME-1, Ber-EP4, MOC-31, carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), CA-125, CD15, estrogen receptor (ER), CD31, and CD34 (Dako, Carpinteria, CA). Electron microscopy was performed in 2 cases.
RESULTS
Seven cases presenting with ovarian masses were reclassified as mesothelioma, over an 8-year period (1999 to 2007). All patients had undergone surgery with a clinical diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Patients ranged in age from 22 to 52 years (mean 32.7 y, median 33 y). By imaging, the lesions were described as complex masses with variable solid and cystic components. On gross examination, the ovarian masses were predominantly solid in 3 cases and predominantly cystic in 4 cases. The lesions varied from 3.8 to 9 cm (mean 5.76 cm) in dimension. Six patients had peritoneal and/or omental involvement; 1 case (number 4) was seen in consultation and detailed information on extraovarian involvement was not available. Clinicopathologic features are summarized in Table 1.
TABLE 1.
Clinicopathologic features
| Case number | Age (y) | Imaging/gross | Sites | Size (cm) | Diagnosis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| 1 | 22 | Predominantly solid | Ovary, colon, omentum | 5 | Malignant mesothelioma |
| 2 | 22 | Predominantly solid | Ovary, peritoneum | 9 | Mucinous tumor; mesothelioma |
| 3 | 30 | Predominantly cystic | Ovary, peritoneum | Multiple, 4 | Multicystic mesothelioma |
| 4 | 33 | Predominantly cystic | Ovary | Not known | Multicystic mesothelioma |
| 5 | 34 | Predominantly cystic | Ovary, pelvis, colon | Multiple, 7 | Multicystic mesothelioma |
| 6 | 36 | Predominantly cystic | Ovary, pelvis | 3.8 | Multicystic mesothelioma |
| 7 | 52 | Predominantly solid | Ovary, peritoneum | 5 | Malignant mesothelioma |
Four cases (case numbers 3 to 6) had features of multicystic mesothelioma (Fig. 1). All 4 patients with multicystic mesothelioma were in the fourth decade of life. However, the 4 patients showed variable extent of disease. Case number 3 had multiple ovarian cysts measuring up to 4 cm in diameter. In addition, there was a multilocular peritoneal cyst measuring 4.3 cm, with individual locules ranging from 0.2 to 1 cm and containing serous fluid. Case number 5 presented with pelvic pain and imaging identified a right adnexal mass. Multiple cystic lesions were found involving predominantly the right ovary, and also the peritoneal surfaces of the left fallopian tube, pelvic side walls, cul-de-sac, urinary bladder, and rectosigmoid colon. The individual lesions contained clear fluid and ranged in size from 0.3 to 4.5 cm. Case number 6 was a 36-year-old woman with sickle cell disease, who presented with chronic pelvic pain. A multi-cystic, complex right ovarian mass was seen on imaging studies. Intraoperatively, the ovarian mass was densely adherent to the posterior cul-de-sac. The ovarian mass measured 3.8 cm and showed multiple cysts containing clear and hemorrhagic fluid. A separate pelvic cyst (1.2 cm) was also excised. Case number 4 was seen in consultation and no operative details were available. All tumors in these 4 patients showed similar morphology and comprised multiple variably sized cysts separated by fibrous/adipose septa. The cysts were lined with a single layer of flattened-to-cuboidal/hobnailed cells with no or little atypia. Immunohistochemically, the lining cells were positive for pancytokeratin, calretinin, and CK5/6, and negative for CEA consistent with mesothelial lineage. CD31 and CD34 stains were negative and helped to exclude lymphangiomatosis.
FIG. 1.
Multicystic mesothelioma was comprised of multiple variably sized cysts separated by fibrous/adipose septa; cysts were lined by a single layer of flattened-to-cuboidal/hobnailed mesothelial cells with no or little atypia [(A) hematoxylin and eosin, 200 ×]. Lining cells were uniformly positive for calretinin [(B) 200 ×] and cytokeratin5/6 [(C) 200 ×].
Case number 1 presented with a right tuboovarian mass. Intraoperatively, there was apparent involvement of the serosal surfaces of the small and large intestines and the omentum. The tuboovarian mass (5 cm) was solid and cystic, the cyst being multilocular. Histopathologic evaluation showed epithelioid tumor cells in sheets and glandular formations, many showing papillary proliferation (Fig. 2). The cells were large with ample eosinophilic to clear cytoplasm, and had central nuclei with prominent nucleoli. However, unlike a typical serous carcinoma, there was no significant nuclear pleomorphism and only occasional scattered mitotic figures were seen. The omental and peritoneal components showed invasion of underlying fat. Immunostains were positive for calretinin, CK5/6, CK7, and CA125, and were negative for BER-EP4, ER, CK20, and CEA, consistent with mesothelioma. Case number 2 presented with a predominantly solid left ovarian mass (9 cm), which, on gross examination, was seen to have a gray white-to-red glistening cut surface. Histologically, there were 2 components: a borderline mucinous tumor, intestinal type, and a malignant spindle and epithelioid neoplasm (Fig. 3). The borderline mucinous tumor component was characterized by an arborizing villous architecture lined by pseudostratified and focally stratified gastric-type mucinous epithelium without intraepithelial carcinoma or stromal invasion. This component was positive for pancytokeratin (AE1/AE3), CK20, polyclonal CEA, focally positive for CD15, and negative for calretinin, CA125, and CK5/6. The adjacent malignant spindle and epithelioid neoplasm was initially considered to be either a focus of anaplastic carcinoma or a sarcomatoid mural nodule occurring in a mucinous ovarian tumor. However, this malignant component involved peritoneal surfaces and omentum, with invasion into fat, and had the immunoprofile of a mesothelioma, staining positive for CK7 and calretinin, and negative for CK20, BER-EP4, MOC31, CD15, and CK5/6. Electron microscopy was performed to further resolve the differential diagnosis and showed long, slender microvilli, supporting a diagnosis of mesothelioma.
FIG. 2.
The tumor in case number 1 showed cells in papillary and tubular formations (hematoxylin and eosin, 100 ×), that were positive for calretinin and cytokeratin5/6 (not shown).
FIG. 3.
Case number 2 showed features of a borderline mucinous tumor [(A) H&E, 100 ×]. A mural nodule was identified, comprised of a malignant sarcomatoid [(B) H&E, 100 ×] and epithelioid neoplasm [(C) H&E, 200 ×], positive for calretinin [(D) 200 ×]. H&E indicates hematoxylin and eosin.
The oldest patient in our study (case number 7) presented with vaginal bleeding and an adnexal mass. An endometrial biopsy revealed atypical epithelioid cells positive for calretinin and the patient was taken up for surgery. Intraoperatively, there was disseminated abdominal tumor involving the uterus, left ovary, peritoneal surfaces, and the diaphragm. Histologically, the tumor had a papillary and glandular architecture. The ovarian involvement was predominantly confined to the surface and superficial parenchyma, whereas the uterus showed focal transmural involvement reaching the endometrial surface. The tumor cells were positive for pancytokeratin, calretinin, CA125, and HBME-1, and were negative for BER-EP4, CD15, CK5/6, and ER. Electron microscopy showed tumor cells with abundant vacuoles, rough endoplasmic reticulum, and prominent slender microvilli projecting into intercellular lumina, consistent with a malignant mesothelioma.
DISCUSSION
Ovarian involvement with mesothelioma is distinctly uncommon. Ovarian mesotheliomas comprised 0.03% of the mesothelioma-related deaths in the United Kingdom registry, over a 24-year period (7). Although diffuse peritoneal mesothelioma may secondarily involve the ovaries, these patients present with abdominal disease rather than with ovarian masses (6,8). Goldblum and Hart (9) found secondary ovarian disease in 10 cases with diffuse peritoneal mesothelioma; the average age of the cohort was 52 years and all the patients predominantly had surface or superficial stromal involvement. Clement et al (10) reported a series of 9 cases of malignant mesothelioma presenting as ovarian masses. The average age of the patients was 52 years; 7 of 9 had an extensive extraovarian peritoneal tumor, whereas the tumors were confined to the ovaries in 2 cases. Attanoos and Gibbs (7) found only 4 cases (average age 60 y) with predominant ovarian involvement among 11,629 malignant mesothelioma deaths in the United Kingdom. Our study is different from the above series in many respects. The patients in the present series are younger (average 33 y age). All patients presented with ovarian masses and extraovarian disease was only discovered at surgery. Further, all but 1 had predominant ovarian involvement. Only case number 7 had more extensive peritoneal disease with secondary involvement of ovarian surface and superficial parenchyma.
Four of our cases had the features of multicystic mesothelioma, a lesion that was specifically excluded in the study by Goldblum and Hart (9). The origin and pathogenesis of multicystic mesothelioma remain uncertain. Some investigators consider multicystic mesothelioma to be benign or indolent lesions and label them as multiloculated peritoneal inclusion cysts (11–13). However, others have described these as neoplasms with a slow but progressive growth of untreated lesions, a marked tendency to recur after surgical resection, malignant transformation, and high disease-related mortality (14–16). The uncertain pathogenesis, coupled with the potential for transformation into a potentially lethal process has resulted in a more aggressive approach to manage these neoplasms, with definitive tumor eradication by cytoreduction and hyperemic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Multimodality therapy confers significantly better overall survival than conventional debulking procedures in these patients (5). Multicystic mesotheliomas occur most frequently in young to middle-aged premenopausal women, most often in the pelvic peritoneum, growing along the surfaces of the cul-de-sac, uterus, and rectum (17). Three of our 4 cases of multicystic mesothelioma had extraovarian involvement and, in the fourth case (case number 4, seen in consultation), no further information regarding extraovarian pathology was known. Given the young age at occurrence, the presence of extraovarian disease and the potential (however small) for malignant transformation, it is important to recognize this entity to triage patients for further management. These patients may need close follow-up to identify recurrence or extension of peritoneal disease.
Mural nodules are rare lesions seen in the walls of mucinous cystic tumors of the ovary. These mural nodules may be benign, "sarcoma-like" nodules (18,19) or may represent true malignancies including sarcomas (20,21), anaplastic carcinomas (22,23), and carcinosarcoma (24). Sarcoma-like mural nodules are well-delimited lesions restricted to the ovary, comprising a cellular heterogeneous population of inflammatory cells, fibroblastic cells, and/or giant cells, and are considered to be reactive in nature with favorable prognosis. In contrast, the presence of a true sarcoma or carcinoma is associated with a poor outcome, especially if the malignancy extends beyond the ovary. Our case showed a histologically malignant neoplasm with extraovarian involvement in association with a borderline mucinous tumor. The biphasic morphology with spindle and epithelioid cells raised a differential diagnosis of anaplastic carcinoma and carcinosarcoma. Anaplastic carcinomas associated with mucinous tumors have been described to have varied morphology including rhabdoid, sarcomatoid, and pleomorphic patterns (23). Carcinosarcomas are also biphasic neoplasms, but usually contain heterologous elements (chondrosarcoma or rhabdomyosarcoma). Although our case showed mixed epithelioid and spindled morphology, the absence of heterologous elements, the immunostaining profile, and the long slender villi seen on electron microscopy favor a diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma. Alternatively, the presence of 2 distinct components does raise a differential diagnosis of a diffuse mesothelioma secondarily involving an ovary with a preexisting borderline mucinous tumor. To the best of our knowledge, ours is the first case with a combined mesothelioma and mucinous tumor. However, many of the so-called sarcoma-like mural nodules reported in literature have not been extensively evaluated by immunostains and electron microscopy; it is conceivable that some of these sarcoma-like nodules could in fact represent spindle cell mesotheliomas.
In the ovary, mesotheliomas need to be differentiated from other neoplasms. The differential diagnosis of multicystic mesotheliomas includes benign lesions such as cystic lymphangioma, cystic forms of endosalpingiosis, endometriosis, and cystic adenomatoid tumors (25). Cystic lymphangiomas are lined with endothelial cells that are positive for CD31, CD34, and D2–40 immunostains, although the latter stain by itself is not helpful in differentiation as it is also positive in mesotheliomas. Endometriosis and endosalpingiosis can be separated by adequate sampling, identification of the lining epithelium and stroma, and positive staining for epithelial markers. Adenomatoid tumors consist of epithelioid cells that form vacuoles and tubular spaces within a fibrous stroma. However, they are immunopositive for keratin and mesothelial markers, similar to multicystic mesotheliomas. Composite tumors with both multicystic mesothelioma and adenomatoid tumors have also been reported, suggesting that they may be different morphologic manifestations of the same process (26). Diffuse malignant mesotheliomas need to be differentiated from primary ovarian carcinomas. Use of immunohistochemistry and electron microscopy are helpful in this regard (27–30). At the same time, one must remember that the florid-reactive mesothelial proliferations may be seen in association with other neoplastic processes and could be a diagnostic pitfall (31). The presence of extraovarian mesothelial proliferation by itself is not sufficient to make a diagnosis of mesothelioma and unequivocal stromal invasion, as seen in our cases, is a prerequisite for this diagnosis.
In conclusion, mesothelial tumors can present as ovarian masses in both young and older women. A high index of suspicion and ancillary studies are necessary for correct diagnosis. Awareness of this presentation is important to establish appropriate surgical and adjuvant therapies.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
REFERENCES
- 1.Boffetta P. Epidemiology of peritoneal mesothelioma: a review. Ann Oncol 2007;18:985–90. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Mohamed F, Sugarbaker PH. Peritoneal mesothelioma. Curr Treat Options Oncol 2002;3:375–86. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Alexander HR, Hanna N, Pingpank JF. Clinical results of cytoreduction and HIPEC for malignant peritoneal mesothelioma. Cancer Treat Res 2007;134:343–55. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Eltabbakh GH, Piver MS, Hempling RE, et al. Clinical picture, response to therapy, and survival of women with diffuse malignant peritoneal mesothelioma. J Surg Oncol 1999;70:6–12. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Baratti D, Kusamura S, Nonaka D, et al. Multicystic and well-differentiated papillary peritoneal mesothelioma treated by surgical cytoreduction and hyperthermic intra-peritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). Ann Surg Oncol 2007;14:2790–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Moertel CG. Peritoneal mesothelioma. Gastroenterology 1972;63: 346–50. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Attanoos RL, Gibbs AR. Primary malignant gonadal mesotheliomas and asbestos. Histopathology 2000;37:150–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.McCluggage WG, Wilkinson N. Metastatic neoplasms involving the ovary: a review with an emphasis on morphological and immunohistochemical features. Histopathology 2005;47: 231–47. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Goldblum J, Hart WR. Localized and diffuse mesotheliomas of the genital tract and peritoneum in women. A clinicopathological study of nineteen true mesothelial neoplasms, other than adenomatoid tumors, multicystic mesotheliomas and localized fibrous tumors. Am J Surg Pathol 1995;19:1124–37. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Clement PB, Young RH, Scully RE. Malignant mesotheliomas presenting as ovarian masses. A report of nine cases, including two primary ovarian mesotheliomas. Am J Surg Pathol 1996; 20:1067–80. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Daya D, McCaughey WT. Pathology of the peritoneum: a review of selected topics. Semin Diagn Pathol 1991;8:277–89. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.McFadden DE, Clement PB. Peritoneal inclusion cysts with mural mesothelial proliferation. A clinicopathological analysis of six cases. Am J Surg Pathol 1986;10:844–54. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Ross MJ, Welch WR, Scully RE. Multilocular peritoneal inclusion cysts (so-called cystic mesotheliomas). Cancer 1989;64: 1336–46. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Weiss SW, Tavassoli FA. Multicystic mesothelioma. An analysis of pathologic findings and biologic behavior in 37 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 1988;12:737–46. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Katsube Y, Mukai K, Silverberg SG. Cystic mesothelioma of the peritoneum: a report of five cases and review of the literature. Cancer 1982;50:1615–22. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Gonzalez-Moreno S, Yan H, Alcorn KW, et al. Malignant transformation of "benign" cystic mesothelioma of the peritoneum. J Surg Oncol 2002;79:243–51. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Churg A, Cagle PT, Roggli VL. Localized benign tumors and tumor-like conditions of the serosal membranes. Tumors of the Serosal Membranes. AFIP Atlas of Tumor Pathology, Series 4. Silver Spring, MD: ARP Press; 2006:103–18. [Google Scholar]
- 18.Prat J, Scully RE. Ovarian mucinous tumors with sarcoma-like mural nodules: a report of seven cases. Cancer 1979;44: 1332–44. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Bague S, Rodriguez IM, Prat J. Sarcoma-like mural nodules in mucinous cystic tumors of the ovary revisited: a clinicopathologic analysis of 10 additional cases. Am J Surg Pathol 2002; 26:1467–76. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Prat J, Scully RE. Sarcomas in ovarian mucinous tumors: a report of two cases. Cancer 1979;44:1327–31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Bruijn JA, Smit VT, Que DG, et al. Immunohistology of a sarcomatous mural nodule in an ovarian mucinous cystadenocarcinoma. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1987;6:287–93. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Prat J, Young RH, Scully RE. Ovarian mucinous tumors with foci of anaplastic carcinoma. Cancer 1982;50:300–4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Provenza C, Young RH, Prat J. Anaplastic carcinoma in mucinous ovarian tumors: a clinicopathologic study of 34 cases emphasizing the crucial impact of stage on prognosis, their histologic spectrum, and overlap with sarcomalike mural nodules. Am J Surg Pathol 2008;32:383–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Chang WC, Sheu BC, Lin MC, et al. Carcinosarcoma-like mural nodule in intestinal-type mucinous ovarian of borderline malignancy: a case report. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2005;15: 549–53. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Safioleas MC, Constantinos K, Michael S, et al. Benign multicystic peritoneal mesothelioma: a case report and review of the literature. World J Gastroenterol 2006;12:5739–42. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Chan JK, Fong MH. Composite multicystic mesothelioma and adenomatoid tumour of the uterus: different morphological manifestations of the same process? Histopathology 1996;29: 375–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Ordóñez NG. The diagnostic utility of immunohistochemistry and electron microscopy in distinguishing between peritoneal mesotheliomas and serous carcinomas: a comparative study. Mod Pathol 2006;19:34–48. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Comin CE, Saieva C, Messerini L. h-caldesmon, calretinin, estrogen receptor, and Ber-EP4: a useful combination of immunohistochemical markers for differentiating epithelioid peritoneal mesothelioma from serous papillary carcinoma of the ovary. Am J Surg Pathol 2007;31:1139–48. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Yaziji H, Battifora H, Barry TS, et al. Evaluation of 12 antibodies for distinguishing epithelioid mesothelioma from adenocarcinoma: identification of a three-antibody immunohistochemical panel with maximal sensitivity and specificity. Mod Pathol 2006;19:514–23. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Vang R, Whitaker BP, Farhood AI, et al. Immunohistochemical analysis of clear cell carcinoma of the gynecologic tract. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2001;20:252–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Clement PB, Young RH. Florid mesothelial hyperplasia associated with ovarian tumors: a potential source of error in tumor diagnosis and staging. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1993; 12:51–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]



