PAX2与肾细胞癌抗原在黏液表皮样癌中的表达

Yunguang Liu, R. Cheney, A. Omilian, C. Morrison, Bo Xu
{"title":"PAX2与肾细胞癌抗原在黏液表皮样癌中的表达","authors":"Yunguang Liu, R. Cheney, A. Omilian, C. Morrison, Bo Xu","doi":"10.7156/NAJMS.2012.054203","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (CCRCC) is the most common metastatic clear cell tumor in the head and neck. The most common primary tumor of the head and neck with clear cell morphology is mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC). The distinction between MEC with clear cells (CMEC) and metastatic CCRCC can be challenging in a small biopsy specimen. Expression of PAX2 and renal cell carcinoma antigen (RCCma) has been widely used to aid of diagnosis for both primary and metastatic RCC. The aim of this study is to evaluate the utility of expression of PAX2 and RCCma between CMEC and metastatic CCRCC in a clinical setting using tissue microarrays (TMAs). In primary CCRCC, the nuclear immunoreactivity for PAX2 was found in 47 of 120 cases (39%), and the membranous staining pattern for RCCma was revealed in 69 of 120 cases (58%). The immunostain profiles of metastatic RCC showed positive staining for PAX2 in 21 of 94 cases (22%) and RCCma in 19 cases (20%), respectively. Two of six cases (33%) of metastatic RCC to the head and neck region display immunoreactivity for either PAX2 or RCCma. For MEC, positive membranous and cytoplasmic staining of RCCma was found in 3 of 23 cases (13%), and diffuse cytoplasmic reactivity for PAX2 was noted in 19 cases (83%). However, none of MEC showed nuclear reactivity that is specific for PAX2. Results of our study suggest that although PAX2 and RCCma are relatively specific for CCRCC, one should be cautious when interpreting the results of RCCma and PAX2 expression in the setting of CMEC versus metastatic CCRCC, particularly in a biopsy specimen. Clinicopathologic correlation combined with histomorphology and a panel of immunohistochemical markers is essential to render correct diagnosis. [N A J Med Sci. 2012;5(4):203-207.]","PeriodicalId":19338,"journal":{"name":"North American journal of medicine & science","volume":"27 1","pages":"203"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Expression of PAX2 and Renal Cell Carcinoma Antigen in Mucoepidermoid Carcinoma\",\"authors\":\"Yunguang Liu, R. Cheney, A. Omilian, C. Morrison, Bo Xu\",\"doi\":\"10.7156/NAJMS.2012.054203\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (CCRCC) is the most common metastatic clear cell tumor in the head and neck. The most common primary tumor of the head and neck with clear cell morphology is mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC). The distinction between MEC with clear cells (CMEC) and metastatic CCRCC can be challenging in a small biopsy specimen. Expression of PAX2 and renal cell carcinoma antigen (RCCma) has been widely used to aid of diagnosis for both primary and metastatic RCC. The aim of this study is to evaluate the utility of expression of PAX2 and RCCma between CMEC and metastatic CCRCC in a clinical setting using tissue microarrays (TMAs). In primary CCRCC, the nuclear immunoreactivity for PAX2 was found in 47 of 120 cases (39%), and the membranous staining pattern for RCCma was revealed in 69 of 120 cases (58%). The immunostain profiles of metastatic RCC showed positive staining for PAX2 in 21 of 94 cases (22%) and RCCma in 19 cases (20%), respectively. Two of six cases (33%) of metastatic RCC to the head and neck region display immunoreactivity for either PAX2 or RCCma. For MEC, positive membranous and cytoplasmic staining of RCCma was found in 3 of 23 cases (13%), and diffuse cytoplasmic reactivity for PAX2 was noted in 19 cases (83%). However, none of MEC showed nuclear reactivity that is specific for PAX2. Results of our study suggest that although PAX2 and RCCma are relatively specific for CCRCC, one should be cautious when interpreting the results of RCCma and PAX2 expression in the setting of CMEC versus metastatic CCRCC, particularly in a biopsy specimen. Clinicopathologic correlation combined with histomorphology and a panel of immunohistochemical markers is essential to render correct diagnosis. [N A J Med Sci. 2012;5(4):203-207.]\",\"PeriodicalId\":19338,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"North American journal of medicine & science\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"203\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"North American journal of medicine & science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7156/NAJMS.2012.054203\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"North American journal of medicine & science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7156/NAJMS.2012.054203","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

透明细胞肾细胞癌(CCRCC)是头颈部最常见的转移性透明细胞肿瘤。头颈部最常见的细胞形态清晰的原发肿瘤是粘液表皮样癌(MEC)。在一个小的活检标本中,区分带有透明细胞(CMEC)的MEC和转移性CCRCC是有挑战性的。PAX2和肾细胞癌抗原(RCCma)的表达已被广泛用于辅助原发性和转移性肾细胞癌的诊断。本研究的目的是在临床环境中利用组织微阵列(TMAs)评估PAX2和RCCma在CMEC和转移性CCRCC之间表达的效用。在原发性CCRCC中,120例患者中有47例(39%)发现PAX2的核免疫反应,120例患者中有69例(58%)发现RCCma的膜性染色模式。94例转移性RCC中PAX2阳性21例(22%),RCCma阳性19例(20%)。6例头颈部转移性RCC中有2例(33%)对PAX2或RCCma表现出免疫反应性。对于MEC, 23例患者中3例(13%)发现RCCma膜质和细胞质染色阳性,19例(83%)发现PAX2弥漫性细胞质反应。然而,MEC均未显示PAX2特异性的核反应性。我们的研究结果表明,尽管PAX2和RCCma对CCRCC具有相对特异性,但在CMEC和转移性CCRCC的情况下,特别是在活检标本中,解释RCCma和PAX2表达的结果时应谨慎。临床病理相关结合组织形态学和一组免疫组织化学标记是作出正确诊断所必需的。[J] .中华医学杂志,2012;5(4):203-207。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Expression of PAX2 and Renal Cell Carcinoma Antigen in Mucoepidermoid Carcinoma
Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (CCRCC) is the most common metastatic clear cell tumor in the head and neck. The most common primary tumor of the head and neck with clear cell morphology is mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC). The distinction between MEC with clear cells (CMEC) and metastatic CCRCC can be challenging in a small biopsy specimen. Expression of PAX2 and renal cell carcinoma antigen (RCCma) has been widely used to aid of diagnosis for both primary and metastatic RCC. The aim of this study is to evaluate the utility of expression of PAX2 and RCCma between CMEC and metastatic CCRCC in a clinical setting using tissue microarrays (TMAs). In primary CCRCC, the nuclear immunoreactivity for PAX2 was found in 47 of 120 cases (39%), and the membranous staining pattern for RCCma was revealed in 69 of 120 cases (58%). The immunostain profiles of metastatic RCC showed positive staining for PAX2 in 21 of 94 cases (22%) and RCCma in 19 cases (20%), respectively. Two of six cases (33%) of metastatic RCC to the head and neck region display immunoreactivity for either PAX2 or RCCma. For MEC, positive membranous and cytoplasmic staining of RCCma was found in 3 of 23 cases (13%), and diffuse cytoplasmic reactivity for PAX2 was noted in 19 cases (83%). However, none of MEC showed nuclear reactivity that is specific for PAX2. Results of our study suggest that although PAX2 and RCCma are relatively specific for CCRCC, one should be cautious when interpreting the results of RCCma and PAX2 expression in the setting of CMEC versus metastatic CCRCC, particularly in a biopsy specimen. Clinicopathologic correlation combined with histomorphology and a panel of immunohistochemical markers is essential to render correct diagnosis. [N A J Med Sci. 2012;5(4):203-207.]
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
2015 Reviewers List 2013 Reviewers List 2016 Reviewers List Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Infection: A Review of Current Direct-Acting Antiviral Treatment Strategies. Dietary Fiber Intake and Mortality from All Causes, Cardiovascular Disease, Cancer, Infectious Diseases and Others: A Meta-Analysis of 42 Prospective Cohort Studies with 1,752,848 Participants
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1