|
| ||
|
|
||
Carcinoma Marker (carcinoma + marker)
Selected AbstractsUtility of CD10 and RCCma in the diagnosis of metastatic conventional renal-cell adenocarcinoma by fine-needle aspiration biopsyDIAGNOSTIC CYTOPATHOLOGY, Issue 1 2005Aylin Simsir M.D. Abstract The cytologic diagnosis of primary conventional renal-cell adenocarcinoma (cRCC) is usually straightforward; however, metastatic cRCC must be distinguished from a variety of neoplasms with clear-cell features. CD10, a cell membrane-associated neutral endopeptidase, and renal-cell carcinoma marker (RCCma), an antibody against human proximal tubular brush border antigen, have recently been shown to be useful in the diagnosis of cRCC. We compared CD10 and RCCma in cell block material from fine-needle aspiration biopsies (FNABs) to assess their utility in the diagnosis of metastatic cRCC, in cytologic specimens. Seven primary and sixteen metastatic cRCCs were immunostained with CD10 and RCCma. The immunoreactivity results were compared with those of a variety of neoplasms originating from other sites such as the liver, lungs, breast, and the gastrointestinal tract. The sensitivity and specificity of CD10 for cRCC were 100% and 59%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of RCCma for cRCC were 35% and 100%, respectively. We conclude that CD10 has limited value in confirming the diagnosis of cRCC because of its low specificity. RCCma, when positive, is highly specific for cRCC, but its low sensitivity hinders its diagnostic usefulness. Diagn. Cytopathol. 2005;33:3,7. © 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [source] Renal cell carcinoma marker reliably discriminates central nervous system haemangioblastoma from brain metastases of renal cell carcinomaHISTOPATHOLOGY, Issue 6 2008B Ingold Aims:, The distinction between central nervous system (CNS) metastases of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and CNS haemangioblastoma still poses a challenge to the pathologist. Since both entities occur in von Hippel,Lindau disease, this aggravates the issue. The antibody renal cell carcinoma marker (RCC-ma) has been suggested to identify primary RCCs specifically, but its value for diagnosing metastases of RCC is controversial. The aim was to assess two distinct clones of the RCC-ma for their potential to: (i) identify primary RCCs and (ii) differentiate between CNS metastases of clear cell RCC and CNS haemangioblastomas. Methods and results:, Using tissue microarrays, 77% (n = 363; PN-15) and 66% (n = 355; 66.4C2) of clear cell RCCs, and 93% (PN-15) and 74% (66.4C2) of papillary RCCs (n = 46) were immunopositive for RCC-ma, whereas none of the investigated chromophobe RCCs (n = 22) or any of the oncocytomas (n = 15) showed immunoreactivity. Importantly, 50.9% of CNS metastases of clear cell RCCs (n = 55) exhibited RCC-ma expression, whereas all CNS haemangioblastomas (71) were negative. Conclusions:, Both RCC-ma clones, despite some variation in their sensitivity to detect clear cell and papillary RCCs, are of value in differentiating subtypes of primary RCC and are excellent markers for discriminating clear cell lesions in the brain. [source] The diagnostic utility of MOC31, BerEP4, RCC marker and CD10 in the classification of renal cell carcinoma and renal oncocytoma: an immunohistochemical analysis of 328 casesHISTOPATHOLOGY, Issue 5 2004C-C Pan Aims:, To demonstrate the diagnostic utility of MOC31, BerEP4, renal cell carcinoma marker (RCC Ma) and CD10 in the classification of RCC and renal oncocytoma, based upon a comprehensive immunohistochemical analysis. Methods and results:, Immunohistochemistry was performed on 328 samples consisting of 256 clear cell/conventional, 27 papillary, 28 chromophobe, five collecting duct, five unclassified RCCs and seven renal oncocytomas using antibodies MOC31, BerEP4 and antibodies against cytokeratins (KL-1, CAM5.2, 34,E12, cytokeratin 7), RCC Ma, epithelial membrane antigen, E-cadherin, CD10, CD15 and vimentin. Multivariate analysis showed that MOC31, BerEP4, RCC Ma and CD10 have discriminatory value. MOC31 and BerEP4 chiefly labelled distal tubules of normal kidney while RCC Ma and CD10 labelled the proximal tubules. Twenty-three chromophobe RCCs (82%) were reactive for MOC31, while only four clear cell RCCs and three papillary RCCs were positive for this marker. Clear cell RCCs were characterized by a high positive rate for CD10 (82%) and a low positive rate for BerEP4 (27%). Papillary RCCs frequently coexpressed RCC Ma and BerEP4 (51%). All renal oncocytomas were negative for MOC31 and CD10. Conclusions:, MOC31 has diagnostic merit in discerning chromophobe RCC. The CD10+/BerEP4, profile and RCC Ma+/BerEP4+ profile achieve moderate sensitivity and good specificity for clear cell RCC and papillary RCC, respectively. The non-reactivity for both MOC31 and CD10 is helpful in distinguishing renal oncocytoma from RCC. When properly selected, antibodies have immunohistochemical diagnostic utility for the classification of renal cortical epithelial tumours. [source] Immunophenotypic Comparison of Salivary Gland Oncocytoma and Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma,THE LARYNGOSCOPE, Issue 6 2005John A. Ozolek MD Abstract Objectives/Hypothesis: The differential diagnosis of oncocytic neoplasms of salivary glands includes both primary and metastatic tumors, one of which is renal cell carcinoma. This study compared immunohistochemical staining characteristics of oncocytomas arising from salivary gland to metastatic renal cell carcinoma using a panel of markers. Study Design: Immunohistochemistry for cytokeratin 7 (CK7), cytokeratin 20 (CK20), epithelial membrane antigen (EMA), vimentin, CD10, and renal cell carcinoma marker (RCC) was performed on 10 oncocytomas and compared with ten metastatic renal cell carcinomas. Results: There were overlapping histologic findings in the oncocytomas and metastatic renal cell carcinomas, with oncocytomas displaying clear cell changes in 2 of 10 cases. CK7 was positive in 9 of 10 oncocytomas and CK20 in 8 of 10 (7/10 stained for both), and vimentin was only weakly positive in 4 of 10 oncocytomas. All oncocytomas were EMA positive, with membranous staining, and all were negative for CD10 and RCC. Metastatic renal cell carcinoma was strongly positive for vimentin, EMA, and CD10 in most cases. RCC and CK7 were variably positive in metastatic renal cell carcinomas (4/10), and only 1 of 10 showed weak staining with CK20. Conclusions: Salivary gland oncocytomas and metastatic renal cell carcinomas share some similar histologic and immunohistochemical characteristics. CD10 and CK20 were the most useful markers to distinguish metastatic renal cell carcinoma from oncocytomas in the salivary gland, whereas RCC, EMA, CK7, and vimentin are not as useful. [source] | ||||||||||