Distinguishing malignant mesothelioma, adenocarcinoma and reactive mesothelial proliferation in both cytologic and surgical pathologic specimens is often a diagnostic challenge. Conventional cytomorphologic assessment is an important step in the differential diagnosis of these entities.The pleural effusion cytologies from 40 cases of malignant mesothelioma, 40 cases of adenocarcinoma and 30 cases of reactive mesothelial proliferation diagnosed between 1997 and 2007 were reviewed. Twenty-seven cytologic features which are regarded as useful in the differential diagnosis of mesothelioma, adenocarcinoma and benign mesothelial proliferation were assessed. These cytologic features were subjected to a stepwise logistic regression analysis. Three features were selected to distinguish malignant mesothelioma from adenocarcinoma: giant atypical mesothelial cell (P ¼ 0.0001), nuclear pleomorphism (P ¼ 0.0001) and acinar structures (P ¼ 0.0001), the latter two being characteristics of adenocarcinoma. The variables selected to differentiate malignant mesothelioma from reactive mesothelial cells were: cell ball formation (P ¼ 0.0001), cell in cell engulfment (P ¼ 0.0001) and monolayer cell groups (P ¼ 0.0001), the latter being a feature of benign mesothelial proliferation. When these selected variables were subjected to a stepwise logistic regression analysis, the logistic model correctly predicted 90% of cases of benign mesothelial proliferation versus 97.5% of malignant mesothelioma and 92.5% of malignant mesothelioma versus 92.5% of adenocarcinoma.Conventional cytomorphologic assessment is the first step to establish an accurate diagnosis in pleural effusions. Several cytologic features have predictive value to seperate malignant mesothelioma from adenocarcinoma and reactive mesothelial proliferation. Diagn. Cytopathol. 2009;37:4-10. Key Words: mesothelioma; adenocarcinoma; mesothelial proliferation; cytodiagnosis Primary and metastatic tumors of the pleura are commonly presented with effusions. The cytologic examination of the fluid is one of the first diagnostic techniques attempted in these patients. Identification of the cancer cells in pleural fluid specimens, using minimal, less invasive and cost effective intervention is crucial especially for the early diagnosis and also for the staging, prognosis and management of the malignant neoplasms. [1][2][3][4][5] Distinguishing malignant mesothelioma, reactive mesothelial proliferation and adenocarcinoma in effusion samples is a major diagnostic challenge. A number of techniques, including cell block preparation, histochemical, immunohistochemical and ultrastructural analysis have been used to try to solve these diagnostic dilemmas. The cytological and histological characteristics of these entities have been well described previously however overlapping features cause difficulties in differential diagnosis. There is only a few report about the most useful cytomorphologic criteria for the accurate diagnosis of pleural effusion samples. 3,6,7 The current study evaluates and ...

This study showed that dentists prescribed antibiotics in an arbitrary and mostly unnecessary manner. In general, their antibiotic choices for examined diagnoses could be regarded as irrational. These results indicate the urgent need for improvement of rational antibiotic prescribing habits of dentists.

We evaluated the clinicopathological characteristics and prognostic significance of lung adenocarcinoma with micropapillary pattern (MPP) and analyzed the expression of apoptosis-related markers: caspase-3, bcl-2, and p53. A series of 166 lung adenocarcinoma that had been surgically resected between 2004 and 2009 were reviewed. Histopathologic patterns, presence of tumor necrosis, mitosis, lymphovascular and perineural invasion, the status of pleura, and tumor differentiation were examined. Of the 166 patients; 71 were stage I, 35 stage II, 51 stage III, and nine stage IV. Histologically they were divided into two groups: MPP-positive (n = 55) and MPP-negative (n = 111). The following items were significantly more frequent in the MPP positive group: female gender (p = 0.03), lymph node metastasis (p = 0.031), and pleural invasion (p = 0.045). Age, smoking status, tumor stage, lymphatic invasion, perineural invasion, mitotic count, and survival rates had no statistically significant difference between groups (p > 0.05). In MPP positive tumors, visceral pleural invasion was identified significantly more frequent than in MPP negative tumors, at stage I. Tumors with MPP showed elevated expressions of caspase-3 (94.5%), p53 (60%), and bcl-2 (54.5%). In MPP positive group, the expression of these three markers had no statistically significant impact on survival. In whole population, bcl-2 expression was correlated with a better outcome. We conclude that MPP is associated with poor prognostic factors both in early and late stages in lung adenocarcinoma. Bcl-2 provides prognostic information independent from the MPP.

BACKGROUND The characteristics of COVID-19 outbreak and high fatality rate of COVID-19 infection have attracted the attention of scientists due to the strong interactions between components of metabolic syndrome, metabolic abnormalities, and viral pathobiology of COVID-19. Combined metabolic cofactors supplementation (CMCS) consisting of L-serine, N-acetyl-L-cysteine (NAC), nicotinamide riboside (NR), and L-carnitine tartrate is being studied for the treatment of patients with COVID-19. METHODS We conducted a placebo-controlled, phase-2 clinical trial involving ambulatory COVID-19 patients. A total of 100 patients were randomly assigned on a 3:1 basis to hydroxychloroquine plus CMCS or hydroxychloroquine plus placebo. The total treatment period for the hydroxychloroquine was 5 days, and for the CMCS/placebo was 14 days. Clinical status was evaluated daily by phone, using a binomial scale for subject reported presence or absence for multiple COVID-19 related symptoms. Plasma samples for clinical chemistry analyses were collected on day 0 and day 14. RESULTS A total of 93 patients completed the trial. The combination of CMCS and hydroxychloroquine significantly reduced the average complete recovery time compared with hydroxychloroquine and placebo (6.6 days vs 9.3 days, respectively). Moreover, there was a significant reduction in ALT, AST and LDH levels on day 14 compared to day 0 in the hydroxychloroquine plus CMCS group. The adverse effects were uncommon and self-limiting. CONCLUSIONS In patients with mild-to-moderate COVID-19, CMCS resulted in a significant reduction in recovery time and liver enzymes associated with hepatic function compared to placebo. We observed that CMSC is associated with a low incidence of adverse events.