Peritoneal mesothelioma

Our plain-English summary of Peritoneal mesothelioma, by J. Churg (Environmental Health Perspectives, 1974).

The study

• Author: J. Churg
• Journal: Environmental Health Perspectives
• Published: 1974;9:317-8
• Cited by: 2 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher · Free full text
• In J-M's library: Johns-Manville's company medical library held a copy (J-M no. 002348).

In plain English

This was a short commentary in which the author described a pathology series of tumors that might be classified as peritoneal mesothelioma. The author and colleagues had collected about 120 such cases and studied 82 in detail. About half came from their Environmental Science Laboratory, where about 90% of people had asbestos exposure. The other half came from cases submitted to the Mesothelioma Panel, where about 50% had asbestos exposure. Fiber types were not described. Of the tumors, 75% were classified as epithelial type, 21% as biphasic and 4% as mesenchymal or sarcomatous. Only 32 cases showed patterns most pathologists accept as typical mesothelioma; 28 were suggestive and 22 were atypical. Overall, about one quarter were judged definite, one half probable and one quarter possible. Among 37 autopsy cases, 50% were definite, 33% probable and 17% possible. The author also described a small group that ran a slow course of several years. The author concluded that an indeterminate group needs further study, including more histochemical data and better correlation with the clinical course.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Commentary describing a pathology case series (no formal methods or statistics reported)
• Who was studied: About 120 cases of tumors that might be peritoneal mesothelioma, 82 studied in detail. About half came from the authors' Environmental Science Laboratory and half from cases submitted to the Mesothelioma Panel. Author affiliation: Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York. Dates were not given.
• Exposure: Asbestos exposure (fiber types and jobs not specified): about 90% of the Environmental Science Laboratory cases and about 50% of the Mesothelioma Panel cases
• Main results:
  • Histologically, 75% of tumors were classified as epithelial type, 21% as biphasic, and 4% as mesenchymal or sarcomatous
  • Of the 82 cases studied in detail, 32 (about 1/3) showed patterns accepted as typical mesothelioma, 28 were suggestive but not typical, and 22 were quite atypical
  • Across all cases (autopsy and biopsy), about 1/4 were classified as definite, about 1/2 as probable, and the remaining 1/4 as possible mesothelioma
  • In the autopsy material (37 patients), 50% were classified as definite, 33% as probable, and 17% as possible
  • Quite a number of cases submitted to the Panel as mesothelioma were mucous-cell carcinoma and were rejected
  • The author observed that definite and probable mesotheliomas and carcinomas involving the pleura or peritoneum behaved more or less the same way, quite rapidly leading to the patient's death
  • A small group of mesotheliomas ran a very slow course of several years. In one case, a biopsy looked like definite mesothelioma, but at autopsy there was only fibrosis in the peritoneal cavity
• The authors' conclusion: The author concluded that an indeterminate group remains, which requires further study, especially more histochemical data and better correlation with the clinical course
• Limitations the authors state:
  • The author stated that certainty of diagnosis did not match the histologic classification percentages
  • The author stated that biopsy material was much more difficult to classify than autopsy material
  • One of the slow-course cases described had been incompletely studied

Topics

The National Library of Medicine indexes this study under subjects our site covers: Mesothelioma, Peritoneal mesothelioma.

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Peritoneal Mesothelioma.

Related studies

• Peritoneal mesothelioma — M. Kannerstein, J. Churg (1977)
• Papillary peritoneal tumors in women — A. Foyle, M. Al-Jabi, et al. (1981)
• From the archives of the AFIP: primary peritoneal tumors: imaging features with pathologic correlation — A.D. Levy, J. Arnáiz, et al. (2008)
• Value of mesothelial and epithelial antibodies in distinguishing diffuse peritoneal mesothelioma in females from serous papillary carcinoma of the ovary and peritoneum — R.L. Attanoos, R. Webb, et al. (2002)
• CT imaging of peritoneal carcinomatosis and its mimics — A.D. Diop, M. Fontarensky, et al. (2014)
• A comparative immunohistochemical study of peritoneal and ovarian serous tumors, and mesotheliomas — N. Khoury, U. Raju, et al. (1990)

Browse more research in Environmental Health Perspectives, or return to medical research.