Diffuse Intrapulmonary Malignant Mesothelioma Masquerading as Interstitial Lung Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Malignant mesothelioma typically encases lungs as a thick rind, while relatively sparing lung parenchyma. We describe an unusual presentation of mesothelioma characterized by diffuse intrapulmonary growth, with absent or inconspicuous pleural involvement, clinically simulating interstitial lung disease (ILD). We identified 5 patients (median age 56 y, all men) with diffuse intrapulmonary malignant mesothelioma in our pathology consultation practice from 2009 to 2012. Clinical history, imaging, and pathology materials were reviewed. Symptoms included chronic dyspnea (4 cases), cough (3), and acute dyspnea with bilateral pneumothorax (1). Chest imaging showed irregular opacities (5), reticulation (4), pleural effusions (2), and subpleural nodular densities (1), without radiologic evidence of pleural disease or masses. A clinicoradiologic diagnosis of ILD was made in all cases, and wedge biopsies were performed. Histologic evaluation revealed a neoplastic proliferation of bland epithelioid or spindled cells, showing various growth patterns simulating silicotic nodules, desquamative interstitial pneumonia, organizing pneumonia, and Langerhans cell histiocytosis. Some areas mimicked adenocarcinoma, with lepidic, acinar, micropapillary, and solid patterns. Initial diagnoses by referring pathologists included reactive changes (1), hypersensitivity pneumonitis versus drug reaction (1), desquamative interstitial pneumonia versus neoplasm (1), and mesothelioma (2). Microscopic pleural involvement was identified in 4 cases. Immunohistochemistry confirmed the characteristic immunophenotype of mesothelioma in all cases. Median survival of 3 patients treated with chemotherapy was 28 months. Two patients received no therapy and survived 3 and 4 weeks, respectively. "Diffuse intrapulmonary malignant mesothelioma" is a rare variant with a distinctive presentation that clinically mimics ILD. Recognition is essential to avoid misdiagnosis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".