Advertisement
Advertisement

The Internet Journal of Pulmonary Medicine ISSN: 1531-2984


Solitary Fibrous Tumors of the Pleura: Report of Eight Cases and Literature Review


Armando J. Huaringa M.D. The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center Houston, Texas USA
Nicola Zetola M.D. The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center Houston, Texas USA
Manuel H. Naro M.D. Department of Medicine, White Memorial Medical Center Los Angeles, California USA

Citation:  A.J. Huaringa, N. Zetola, M.H. Naro: Solitary Fibrous Tumors of the Pleura: Report of Eight Cases and Literature Review. The Internet Journal of Pulmonary Medicine. 2006 Volume 6 Number 1


Abstract

Primary pleural tumors have been classified as diffuse or localized types. The diffuse type or malignant mesothelioma (MM) is the most frequently encountered lesion. Localized variety is less frequent and defined. Although its hystogenesis is not well established, new histological and immunohistochemical techniques are giving us a better understanding of it. Now, the common consensus is that this tumor origins from a primitive submesothelial mesenchymal cell (16,17,18,19). Concerning the advances done during the last decade in the understanding, imaging, diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to this rare tumor, we decided to conduct a retrospective study of the cases seen at our institution and a review of the available English literature.


Introduction

Primary pleural tumors have been classified as diffuse or localized types. The diffuse type or malignant mesothelioma (MM) is the most frequently encountered lesion. Localized variety is less frequent and defined. First classified at 1931 by Klemperer and Rabin as a localized primary pleural neoplasm (1), this neoplasm has been reported under different names, including benign mesothelioma, fibrous mesothelioma, submesothelioma, solitary or localized mesothelioma, or subserosal fibroma. The term “solitary benign fibrous tumor of the pleura” is now preferred because histologically these tumors do not have epithelial cells, but is thought that derives from a primitive submesothelial mesenchymal cell with fibroblastic differentiation. We also prefer to avoid using the term benign because of the malignant behavior of some of them.

The solitary fibrous tumor of the pleura (SFTP) arises from the visceral pleura in around 70% of the cases (2). However have been reported cases in the peritoneum and pericardium (2,3,4,5), lung parenchyma, paranasal sinuses, mediastinum, nose and tunica vaginalis among other sites (2,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15).

Although its hystogenesis is not well established, new histological and immunohistochemical techniques are giving us a better understanding of it. Now, the common consensus is that this tumor origins from a primitive submesothelial mesenchymal cell (16,17,18,19).

Concerning the advances done during the last decade in the understanding, imaging, diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to this rare tumor, we decided to conduct a retrospective study of the cases seen at our institution and a review of the available English literature.

Materials And Methods

Eight cases of Solitary Fibrous Tumor of the Pleura (SFTP) were identified from the computer database of our institute from 1990 to 1999. The medical records were reviewed and follow-ups were obtained when it was possible. The clinical relevant information was taken directly from the charts. The chest x-rays, CT scans and pathological lectures were taken from charts and newly reviewed by a pulmonologist and pathologist respectively. All tissues were routinely processed and stained. One of them was examined by electron microscopy. Although there are not well-established criteria for malignancy still available, we considered a SFTP to be malignant if it has high cellularity with crowding and overlapping of nuclei, more than 4 mitotic figures (mf) per 10 high powered fields (hpf), or pleomorphism based of nuclear size, irregularity, and nucleolar prominence (2). All cases were strongly positive for vimentin and CD34 and remained negative for keratins. Other immunohistochemestry is described when it was available.

Results

Clinical findings

From our 8 patients, 4 were male and 4 were female, ranging between 31 and 76 years old (mean 52.25) at the time of diagnosis. Most of them were Caucasians (7 patients) and only one Latin. Although is described that most of the patients are usually asymptomatic (2,20,21) only 3 of our patients were diagnosed with a routine chest x-ray. The symptoms referred by the others were shortness of breath (2 pts), mild chest pain (2 pts), cough (1 pt), severe weakness (not related to hypoglycemia) in 1 patient, and arthritis (1 pt). There were not referred weight loss, hemoptysis, hypoglycemia, fever or night sweats by any patient. The physical exam was unremarkable in most of them (7 pt); finding rales, diminished breath sounds, and tubular sound only in one. Five patients had history of hard tobacco exposure and one of these had also history of asbestos exposure. It is important to mention that this patient was the only one who had recurrence and one of the most aggressive behaviors although all its immunochemical markers were coincident with SFTP. Other epidemiological information and laboratory data were noncontributory.

Radiographic Findings

The radiographic appearance of each patient varied depending on the size and particular characteristics of each tumor. The lesions tend to be more frequent at the bases, finding 5 in the left side and 3 in the right (2 metastases were also found in right hemithorax). The size of the tumors ranged from 1 to 20 cm at the CXr and from 2 to 22 cm at the CT scan, having a good correlate with the size observed at the pathology (2 to 22 cm). The tumors were homogeneous, usually lobulated, sharply delineated and solitaries (in 7 cases), showing intermediate and high attenuation at the CT. There was not possible to detect calcifications at the CXr of any patient, although the CT detected them in 2 patients and the pathology showed them in 3 cases. The CT was also more sensitive detecting the pedicles, encapsulation and attachment to soft tissues. Only the patient 1 had pleural effusion. All this 7 tumors had an obtuse angle within the chest wall suggesting its chest wall origin. The patient number 1 (who had the malignant aggressive tumor) had a radiographic pattern that differed from all others. It seemed to be more diffuse and heterogeneous at the CT, with apparent soft tissue invasion. It also was the only one that showed metastases to the diaphragm and pericardium.

Preoperative Diagnosis

Five of our patients underwent a fluoroscopically guided trans-thoracic fine needle biopsy (FNAB). Based on the cytologic study, the correct diagnosis could be established only in one patient. One case was incorrectly diagnosed as a high-grade osteogenic sarcoma by a pathologist from other institution. There was not possible to establish any diagnosis in the rest. Bronchoscopy was done in 2 patients and was non-contributory in both.

Pathology

Gross Findings

The lesions were widely distributed, tending to be at the bases of the thorax. The tumors were solitary in 7 patients, showing metastases in one. The smallest tumor was 2 cm in greatest diameter and the largest one was 22 cm. The mean diameter was 9 cm. All tumors were encapsulated and almost all pedunculated (6 cases). The capsule was sharp circumscribed as it was described at the CTs. Neither of the malignant cases (2 pt) had pedicle. The pedicles were very vascular. Attachment to soft tissues was observed in 2 cases and one of infiltrated them. Cut section often revealed a firm white, gray, or brown surface. Hemorrhage necrosis and myxoid degeneration was observed in the case #1. Only one other case had necrosis, and none other one had either hemorrhage or myxoid degeneration. Some cases had also little cystic formations.

Light Microscopic Findings

Immunohistochemical Findings

All our cases were strongly positive for CD34 and vimentin and remained negative for keratins. From those, 6 were diffusely positive and the other one presented a focally positively reaction. Other markers were only available for patients 1,2 and 5. The case 1 was also positive for VIM, p53 and Ki-67 (30%). None of these 3 patients were positive for keratins, CAE, SMA, C31, S-100, actin or desmin.

Discussion

Epidemiology

Giving the rarity and usually asymptomatic presentation of this neoplasm, its incidence is not well known. An incidence of 2.8 cases per 100,000 registrations was reported by Okike et al. (21); however, only among 650 cases have been reported so far. The SFTP could presents in a wide age range. Pediatric cases have been reported (2,22,23), but over half of the cases are seen during the 6th and 7th decades of life, with a median age between 51 to 57 (2,20,21). Coincidentally with our results, there is no significant sex predominance,. Most series show it to be more prevalent among Caucasians, but none good study proves it. Its geographic distribution is still not studied. This tumor is not related to asbestos and there is no history of exposure to other industrial pollutants. Few cytogenetic studies have associated the SFTP with trisomy 8 (24) and some specific translocations (25) but its relationship is still unclear.

Histogenesis

Stout and Sano (1942 and 1950 respectively) suggested in different studies the mesothelial origin of this neoplasm (26,27). They reported that cultures of fragments this fibrous tumors produce cells similar to the mesothelial ones. Latter, studies based on ultrastucturaly analysis resulted in the same conclusion (20,28,29,30). However, also based on previous ultrastuctural analyses, in 1979 Dalton et al proposed a submesothelial origin of this neoplasm, based on its ability to differentiate into superfitial mesothelium, non-mesothelial cells, or fibroblast-like cells (16,17). After that, Burrig et al observed the presence of mesenchymal undifferentiated, immature fibroblasts and mature fibroblasts on biopsies of this tumor (18). As is discussed above, actual immunohistochemical studies are also against the mesothelial origin. However, although these immunohistochemical studies define a population of cells able to be the precursor of this neoplasm, they still do not point the exact cell origin (19).

Cytology

The cytology of these tumors shows different degrees of cellularity and include 2 cell populations (Picture 1): sheet and clusters of mesothelial cells, and singly dispersed or loosely cohesive spindle cells (31,32).


                     
          Picture 1: Fibrous tumor of the pleura: Histology

Picture 1: Fibrous tumor of the pleura: Histology

The benign cases tend to show greater degree of cohesion, with many bland-appearing, ovoid spindle cells with mostly naked nuclei or scant cytoplasm arranged in clusters. The nucleoli are usually inconspicuous and there is appreciable low grade of mitotic activity. Cell blocks show collagen with spindle cells juxtaposed (31). There has also been proposed the presence of transitional forms between epithelioid and spindles cell (33) as a characteristic feature. The immunoreactivity to specific markers can also help in the diagnostic process. The malignant cases tend to show greater degree of cellularity, fewer cohesive clusters, and larger number of single cells. The nucleoli are usually prominent and moderate degree of nuclear pleomorphism is present. Mitotic figures are not as notorious at cytology as at histology (31). All cases (benignant and malignant) are involved in a bloody and collageous background (31).

Although some authors suggest cytology as a good diagnostic method (32,34,35,36,37,38,39), neither the cytologic characteristics nor the malignancy diagnostic criteria are well established. The value of cytology is still under debate.

Histopathology

The distinctive histologic features of this tumor are usually not enough to exclude other processes in the differential diagnosis (40). Microscopically, this neoplasm is diagnosed and classified based on its pattern, degree of pleomorfism, mitoses and angiogenesis (41). Its microscopic patterns have been grouped as solid-spindle (the “patternless pattern”, or the hemangiopericytoma-like appearance), and the diffuse-sclerosing pattern (31,32); both presenting most of the times with a very low mitotic rate (less than 1 mf per 10 hpf). However, because of its nonspecific morphologic patterns and the absence of distinctive electron microscopic features, the SFTP could be very difficult to differentiate from other spindle cell neoplasms. It could mimic features of many mesenchymal processes such as fibromatosis, synovial sarcoma, fibrous histiocytoma, fibrosarcoma, or smooth muscle, neural neoplasms, and hemangiopericytomas (40,42). Classically the diagnosis was made based on the histologic appearance and the lack of reactivity to the markers for other tumors (S-100, EMA, keratin, LeuM1, and others). However, this lack of reactivity was usually difficult to interpret because antigen loss could also be responsible for the negative reaction. Until few years ago, many immunohistochemical studies failed to identify a positive marker for the SFTP (40), making the diagnosis of the SFTP uncertain. One of the first positive markers recognized was vimentin (VIM). However this finds lacks of diagnostic value, since most mesenchymal and some epithelial neoplasms are also positive. Latter, Westra et al. (43) and van de Rijn et al. (40) proved in two different studies that CD-34 (a marker first described in hematopoietic stem cells, vascular and smooth muscle tumors) is a good positive marker for the SFTP (40,44).

The criteria of malignancy are still not well established and the prognosis correlate of the histologic features is not clear. At the first big case review, Briselli et al. (20) found that that the best indicator of malignancy was the infiltration of the tumor to the surrounding tissues. In the other side, England et al. found that a high mitotic rate (more than 4 mf per 10 hpf), a high cellularity and pleomorphism correlate with the patient survival, although the best prognostic indicator was the complete resectability of the tumor (2). Encapsulation and pedunculation of the tumor have also been proposed as prognostic factors. Aggressive behavior and metastases has been reported in many tumors that didn't have microscopic features of malignancy. Based on the available data most experts believe, as Briselli et al, that lack of cellular atypia, mitosis and pleomorphism does not exclude malignancy.

Clinical Features

The most usual presentation is as an asymptomatic mass, discovered incidentally in a routine CXr (36 to 53% of the cases) (20,21). When present, mild chest pain, shortness of breath and cough are the most frequent symptoms. Hypoglycemia, weight loss, weakness, arthralgias, pulmonary osteoarthropaty, hemoptysis, fever and night sweats have also been described (2,20,45,46). Symptoms usually resolve when the tumor is resected. The hypoglycemia has been attributed mostly to the intrinsic production of Insulin Grow Factor I (IGF-I) (47,48,49). The physical exam is usually unremarkable and findings are mostly related to the mass effect. The clinical behavior of SFTP is still not well known (50). Most of these tumors are histologically benign (88%). However, rapid enlargement, local recurrences and local and distant metastases have been described among them (37,38,45,51). Malignant tumors are rarely pedunculated, often presenting in atypical locations (lung fissures, mediastinal pleura or intraparechymals), and are frequently greater than 8 cm (20,21,52,53). Rapid enlargement, local recurrences and local and distant metastases are more frequent in this group.

Diagnosis

Pleural fluid

Clinically significant pleural effusion is rare in the SFTP. Fluid production is seen in less than 10% of the patients (2,20) and usually associated with malignant lesions. However cases with huge pleural effusions has been reported (2,20,54). Usually these effusions are exudates, but may also be a transudate. Some authors have proposed that the pH could be of diagnostic and prognostic value separating SFTP from MM (55). Pleural fluid analysis and cytology have not proven diagnostic (21) and more reports are necessary before establishing the value of them as a useful diagnostic and prognostic tool.

Imaging

a) Chest X-rays and CT Scan

Usually CXR and CT are the imaging studies of choice. CXR usually shows a sharply well circumscribed nodule or mass lesion (Picture 2 and 3) forming an obtuse angle with the chest wall, suggesting its pleural origin.


                        
          Picture 2: Fibrous tumor of the pleura: Posterior-anterior view of a chest radiograph showing a mass in the right cardiophrenic angle.

Picture 2: Fibrous tumor of the pleura: Posterior-anterior view of a chest radiograph showing a mass in the right cardiophrenic angle.


                        
          Picture 3: Fibrous tumor of the pleura: Lateral chest radiograph in the same      patient as in Picture 2.

Picture 3: Fibrous tumor of the pleura: Lateral chest radiograph in the same patient as in Picture 2.

At the CT scan, the tumors appear as circumscribed lobulated lesions (Picture 4). Usually an intermediate attenuation on unenhanced CT and high intensity on enhanced scans is observed (56). Low attenuation is seen in relation to myxoid degenerated or hemorrhages areas (56). Cystic degeneration appears as cystic fluid attenuated areas on the scans (56). The pedicle could be observed and provide a clue in the diagnosis (57). Calcification areas are not frequent.


                        
          Picture 4: Fibrous tumor of the pleura: Chest CT scan of the same patient as in pictures 2 and 3. The arrow points at a pedunculated pleural noncalcified soft tissue mass.

Picture 4: Fibrous tumor of the pleura: Chest CT scan of the same patient as in pictures 2 and 3. The arrow points at a pedunculated pleural noncalcified soft tissue mass.

b) RM and Angiography

RM the tumors are usually of intermediate to low signal intensity on T1 and of low signal intensity on T2 or proton density-weighted images (58,59). After the gadolinium administration intense enhancement has been reported (60). RM is also helpful for assessing possible vascular invasion, although angiograms are more definitive. Angiograms are the imaging studies of choice for finding the mayor feeding vessels, which could be used for embolization before surgery. However, unlikely the findings on the CT scan, the RM and angiography are nonspecific.

c) Others

The utility of other imaging and invasive procedures as gallium scan or bronchoscopy is very limited in this entity and is only limited to exclude the presence of other lesions and to rule out another diagnosis. Gallium uptake has been reported (61).

Fine Needle Aspiration Biopsy (FNAB)

The value of this diagnostic procedure is still under debate. Accordingly to some authors, FNAB can yield characteristic morphologic that permit the diagnosis(31,39,62,63,64,65). However, other authors think this technique is neither sensitive nor specific for this purpose (2,37,38,39,53,64,66). The difficulty at the diagnosis with FNAB is mainly because of the impossibility to distinguish between reactive mesothelium and the well-differentiated malignant cells and because of lack of well defined cytologic criteria for the diagnosis (41). Based on the available data, FNAB is not routinely recommended since usually do not permit a definitive diagnosis and do not modify the therapeutic approach.

Treatment

When possible, surgery is always the treatment of choice for primary tumor and recurrences. The entire tumor should be removed. Although most of them could be encapsulated and well circumscribed, some authors recommend large resections of lung parenchyma and surrounding pleura, especially for those presenting a broad base of attachment to the pleural surface (67).

Adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy have been tried, especially for malignant cases. However there is not enough evidence and its benefits remain unproved.

Prognosis

On a review of 52 patient Okike et al. reported 8 patients with malignant SFTP. All of these patients had recurrence or metastases between 6 month and 8 years of follow up. Besides, local recurrence (even after complete resection) has been reported as late as 17 years after the surgery (21). Based on this information, although the prognosis of this entity is usually good, close follow-up should be done for years after resection, especially for the cases with malignant behavior.

Correspondence to

Armando Huaringa, MD, MHA, FACP, FCCP, FCCM Associate Professor of Medicine Loma Linda University School of Medicine White Memorial Medical Center 1720 Cesar Chavez Ave. Los Angeles, CA 90033, USA Telephone: (323) 260-5802

References

1. Klemperer P, Rabin CB. Primary neoplasms of the pleura. Arch Pathol 1999; 11:385-412.
2. England DM, Hochholzer L, McCarthy MJ. Localized benign and malignant fibrous tumors of the pleura. A clinicopathologic review of 223 cases [published erratum appears in Am J Surg Pathol 1991 Aug;15(8):818]. Am J Surg Pathol 1989; 13(8):640-658.
3. Balassiano M, Reichert N, Rosenman Y, Hertcheg E, Lieberman Y, Yellin A . Localized fibrous mesothelioma of the mediastinum devoid of pleural connections. Postgraduate Medical Journal 1989; 65(768):788-790.
4. Goto Y, Sakurada T, Suzuki I, Nanjo H, Masuda H. A localized fibrous tumor (mesothelioma) in the mediastinum: report of a case. Surgery Today 1997; 27(9):871-873.
5. Ibrahim NB, Briggs JC, Corrin B. Double primary localized fibrous tumours of the pleura and retroperitoneum [see comments]. Histopathology 1993; 22(3):282-284.
6. Witkin GB, Rosai J. Solitary fibrous tumor of the mediastinum. A report of 14 cases. American Journal of Surgical Pathology 1989; 13(7):547-557.
7. Witkin GB, Rosai J. Solitary fibrous tumor of the upper respiratory tract. A report of six cases. American Journal of Surgical Pathology 1991; 15(9):842-848.
8. Zukerberg LR, Rosenberg AE, Randolph G, Pilch BZ, Goodman ML. Solitary fibrous tumor of the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses. Am J Surg Pathol 1991; 15(2):126-130.
9. Yousem SA, Flynn SD. Intrapulmonary localized fibrous tumor. Intraparenchymal so-called localized fibrous mesothelioma. American Journal of Clinical Pathology 1988; 89(3):365-369.
10. Safneck JR, Alguacil-Garcia A, Dort JC, Phillips SM. Solitary fibrous tumour: report of two new locations in the upper respiratory tract. Journal of Laryngology & Otology 1993; 107(3):252-256.
11. Lichtenstein DG, Iellin A, Loewenthal MM, Morag B. Solitary mesothelioma of the small intestine . International Surgery 1975; 60 (6-7):366-368.
12. Khan MA, Puri P, Devaney D. Mesothelioma of tunica vaginalis testis in a child. Journal of Urology 1997; 158(1):198-199.
13. Abe S, Imamura T, Tateishi A, Park P, Nakano H, Harasawa A et al. Intramuscular solitary fibrous tumor: a clinicopathological case study. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography 1999; 23(3):458-462.
14. Goodlad JR, Fletcher CD. Solitary fibrous tumour arising at unusual sites: analysis of a series [see comments]. Histopathology 1991; 19(6):515-522.
15. Parveen T, Fleischmann J, Petrelli M. Benign fibrous tumor of the tunica vaginalis testis. Report of a case with light, electron microscopic, and immunocytochemical study, and review of the literature. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1992; 116(3):277-280.
16. Dalton WT, Zolliker AS, McCaughey WT, Jacques J, Kannerstein M. Localized primary tumors of the pleura: an analysis of 40 cases. Cancer 1979; 44(4):1465-1475.
17. Scharifker D, Kaneko M. Localized fibrous "mesothelioma" of pleura (submesothelial fibroma): a clinicopathologic study of 18 cases. Cancer 1979; 43(2):627-635.
18. Burrig KF, Kastendieck H. Ultrastructural observations on the histogenesis of localized fibrous tumours of the pleura (benign mesothelioma). Virchows Archiv - A, Pathological Anatomy & Histopathology 1984; 403(4):413-424.
19. Weiss SW, Nickoloff BJ. CD-34 is expressed by a distinctive cell population in peripheral nerve, nerve sheath tumors, and related lesions [see comments]. Am J Surg Pathol 1993; 17(10):1039-1045.
20. Briselli M, Mark EJ, Dickersin GR. Solitary fibrous tumors of the pleura: eight new cases and review of 360 cases in the literature. Cancer 1981; 47(11):2678-2689.
21. Okike N, Bernatz PE, Woolner LB. Localized mesothelioma of the pleura: benign and malignant variants. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1978; 75(3):363-372.
22. Hanukoglu A, Gewurtz G, Zaidel L, Krispin M, Fried D. Benign cystic mesothelioma of the peritoneum: the occurrence of an adult entity in a child. Med Pediatr Oncol 1992; 20(2):169-171.
23. Stein N, Henkes D. Mesothelioma of the testicle in a child. J Urol 1986; 135(4):794.
24. Berean KW, Miller RR, Horsman D. Solitary fibrous tumor: cytogenetic analysis (abstract). Modern Pathol 1994; 7:149A.
25. Dal Cin P, Pauwels P, Van Den BH. Solitary fibrous tumour of the pleura with t(4;15)(q13;q26) [letter]. Histopathology 1999; 35(1):94-95.
26. Stout AP, Murray MR. Localized fibrous mesothelioma. Investiagations of the characteristics and histogenesis by the method of cell culture. Arch Pathol 1942; 34:951-964.
27. Sano ME, Weiss E, Gault E. Pleural mesothelioma: further evidence of its histogenesis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1950; 19:783-788.
28. Kawai T, Yakumaru K, Mikata A, Kageyama K, Torikata C, Shimosato Y. Solitary (localized) pleural mesothelioma. A light- and electron-microscopic study. American Journal of Surgical Pathology 1978; 2(4):365-375.
29. Dardick I, Srigley JR, McCaughey WT, van Nostrand AW, Ritchie AC. Ultrastructural aspects of the histogenesis of diffuse and localized mesothelioma. Virchows Archiv - A, Pathological Anatomy & Histopathology 1984; 402(4):373-388.
30. Benisch B, Peison B, Sobel HJ, Marquet E. Fibrous mesotheliomas (pseudofibroma) of the scrotal sac: a light and ultrastructural study. Cancer 1981; 47(4):731-735.
31. Ali SZ, Hoon V, Hoda S, Heelan R, Zakowski MF. Solitary fibrous tumor. A cytologic-histologic study with clinical, radiologic, and immunohistochemical correlations. Cancer 1997; 81(2):116-121.
32. Apple SK, Nieberg RK, Hirschowitz SL. Fine needle aspiration biopsy of solitary fibrous tumor of the pleura. A report of two cases with a discussion of diagnostic pitfalls. Acta Cytologica 1997; 41(5):1528-1533.
33. Wetzel WJ. Solitary fibrous tumor [letter]. Hum Pathol 1996; 27(5):513-514.
34. Drachenberg CB, Bourquin PM, Cochran LM, Burke KC, Kumar D, White CS et al. Fine needle aspiration biopsy of solitary fibrous tumors. Report of two cases with histologic, immunohistochemical and ultrastructural correlation. Acta Cytologica 1998; 42(4):1003-1010.
35. Sironi M, Declich P. Fine-needle techniques in the diagnosis of solitary fibrous tumor of the pleura [letter]. Diagnostic Cytopathology 1998; 19(5):400.
36. Sironi M, Declich P, Di Bella C, Assi A . Solitary fibrous tumour of the pleura: a cytohistological and immunohistochemical case study. Cytopathology 1996; 7(4):274-278.
37. Weynand B, Collard P, Galant C. Cytopathological features of solitary fibrous tumor of the pleura: a study of 5 cases. Diagnostic Cytopathology 1998; 18(2):118-124.
38. Weynand B, Noel H, Goncette L, Noirhomme P, Collard P. Solitary fibrous tumor of the pleura: a report of five cases diagnosed by transthoracic cutting needle biopsy. Chest 1997; 112 (5):1424-1428.
39. Dusenbery D, Grimes MM, Frable WJ. Fine-needle aspiration cytology of localized fibrous tumor of pleura. Diagnostic Cytopathology 1992; 8(5):444-450.
40. van de RM, Lombard CM, Rouse RV. Expression of CD34 by solitary fibrous tumors of the pleura, mediastinum, and lung [see comments]. Am J Surg Pathol 1994; 18(8):814-820.
41. Hsu V, Vaezy A, Bridgman A. Mixed clinicopathologic behavior of a solitary mesothelioma. Chest 1988; 94(6):1293-1294.
42. Martens B, Bonnet P, Duquesne L. Solitary Fibrous Tumor Pleura. Acta Chir Belg 1995; 95(3):127-129.
43. Westra WH, Gerald WL, Rosai J. Solitary fibrous tumor. Consistent CD34 immunoreactivity and occurrence in the orbit [see comments]. Am J Surg Pathol 1994; 18(10):992-998.
44. Ordonez NG: Localized (solitary) fibrous tumor of the pleura. Adv Anat Pathol 2000 Nov; 7(6): 327-40.
45. Antman KH. Clinical presentation and natural history of benign and malignant mesothelioma. Semin Oncol 1981; 8(3):313-320.
46. de Perrot M, Kurt AM, Robert JH, Borisch B, Spiliopoulos A. Clinical behavior of solitary fibrous tumors of the pleura. Ann Thorac Surg 1999; 67(5):1456-1459.
47. Baxter RC, Daughaday WH. Impaired formation of the ternary insulin-like growth factor-binding protein complex in patients with hypoglycemia due to nonislet cell tumors. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism 1991; 73(4):696-702.
48. Masson EA, MacFarlane IA, Graham D, Foy P. Spontaneous hypoglycaemia due to a pleural fibroma: role of insulin like growth factors. Thorax 1991; 46(12):930-931.
49. Strom EH, Skjorten F, Aarseth LB, Haug E. Solitary fibrous tumor of the pleura. An immunohistochemical, electron microscopic and tissue culture study of a tumor producing insulin-like growth factor I in a patient with hypoglycemia. Pathology, Research & Practice 1991; 187(1):109-113.
50. Robinson LA, Reilly RB. Localized pleural mesothelioma. The clinical spectrum. Chest 1994; 106(5):1611-1615.
51. Utley JR, Parker JC, Jr., Hahn RS, Bryant LR, Mobin-Uddin K. Recurrent benign fibrous mesothelioma of the pleura. Journal of Thoracic & Cardiovascular Surgery 1973; 65(5):830-834.
52. Aufiero TX, McGary SA, Campbell DB, Phillips PP. Intrapulmonary benign fibrous tumor of the pleura [see comments]. Journal of Thoracic & Cardiovascular Surgery 1995; 110(2):549-551.
53. Sanguinetti CM, Marchesani F, Ranaldi R, Pela R, Cecarini L. Localized fibrous pleural tumour of the interlobular pleura. European Respiratory Journal 1996; 9(5):1094-1096.
54. Ulrik CS, Viskum K. Fibrous pleural tumour producing 171 litres of transudate. European Respiratory Journal 1998; 12(5):1230-1232.
55. Sahn SA, Good JT, Jr. Pleural fluid pH in malignant effusions. Diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic implications. Ann Intern Med 1988; 108(3):345-349.
56. Lee KS, Im JG, Choe KO, Kim CJ, Lee BH. CT findings in benign fibrous mesothelioma of the pleura: pathologic correlation in nine patients [see comments]. AJR 1992; American Journal of Roentgenology. 158(5):983-986.
57. Mendelson DS, Meary E, Buy JN, Pigeau I , Kirschner PA. Localized fibrous pleural mesothelioma: CT findings. Clin Imaging 1991; 15(2):105-108.
58. George JC. Benign fibrous mesothelioma of the pleura: MR findings [letter; comment]. AJR 1993; American Journal of Roentgenology. 160(1):204-205.
59. Ferretti GR, Chiles C, Choplin RH, Coulomb M. Localized benign fibrous tumors of the pleura. AJR 1997; American Journal of Roentgenology. 169(3):683-686.
60. Padovani B, Mouroux J, Raffaelli C, Huys C, Chanalet S, Michiels JF et al. Benign fibrous mesothelioma of the pleura: MR study and pathologic correlation. Eur Radiol 1996; 6(4):425-428.
61. McLean RG, Choy D, Murray IP. Unexpected gallium uptake in benign pulmonary pathology. Report of two cases. Clinical Nuclear Medicine 1984; 9(12):675-678.
62. Ehya H. The cytologic diagnosis of mesothelioma. Semin Diagn Pathol 1986; 3(3):196-203.
63. Ratzer ER, Pool JL, Melamed MR. Pleural mesotheliomas. Clinical experiences with thirty-seven patients. Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nucl Med 1967; 99(4):863-880.
64. Orell SR, Sterret GF, Walters MN, Whitaker D. Manual and Atlas of Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology. Edinburgh, Churchill Livingstone , 142-143. 1986. Ref Type: Serial (Book,Monograph)
65. Tao L-C. Aspiration biopsy cytology of mesothelioma. Diagn Cytopathol 1999; 5:19-21.
66. Domingo A, Rami-Porta R, Tarroch X, Tresserra F, Gonzalez G, Forcada P et al. Localized fibrous tumor of the pleura: immunohistochemical and flow- cytometric DNA study. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1994; 8(11):593-596.
67. Martini N, McCormack PM, Bains MS, Kaiser LR, Burt ME, Hilaris BS. Pleural mesothelioma. Ann Thorac Surg 1987; 43(1):113-120.

Generated at: Wed, 23 May 2012 12:23:49 -0500 (0000088e) — http://www.ispub.com:80/journal/the-internet-journal-of-pulmonary-medicine/volume-6-number-1/solitary-fibrous-tumors-of-the-pleura-report-of-eight-cases-and-literature-review.html