Metanephric adenoma: the utility of immunohistochemical and cytogenetic analyses in differential diagnosis, including solid variant papillary renal cell carcinoma and epithelial-predominant nephroblastoma

. 2015 Sep ; 28 (9) : 1236-48. [epub] 20150807

Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké Médium print-electronic

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/pmid26248896
Odkazy

PubMed 26248896
DOI 10.1038/modpathol.2015.81
PII: S0893-3952(22)01379-5
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje

Metanephric adenoma is a benign renal neoplasm that overlaps in morphology with the solid variant of papillary renal cell carcinoma and epithelial-predominant nephroblastoma. To aid in resolving this differential diagnosis, we investigated the utility of immunohistochemical and molecular analyses in distinguishing between these entities; the first study, to our knowledge, to use a combined approach in analyzing all three tumors. We analyzed 37 tumors originally diagnosed as metanephric adenomas (2 of which we reclassified as papillary renal cell carcinomas), 13 solid variant papillary renal cell carcinomas, and 20 epithelial-predominant nephroblastomas using a combination of immunohistochemistry and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) assessing for trisomy of chromosomes 7 and 17 and loss of Y. Immunohistochemical staining was performed for CK7, AMACR, WT1, and CD57. The combination of CK7-, AMACR-, WT1+, and CD57+ was considered characteristic of metanephric adenoma. Most of the tumors originally diagnosed as metanephric adenomas (31/37) showed the expected staining pattern of metanephric adenoma (CK7-, AMACR-, WT1+, and CD57+). Of the six tumors with discordant immunophenotype, two tumors were reclassified as papillary renal cell carcinoma after cytogenetic workup. It is recommended that all adult cases histologically resembling metanephric adenoma have WT1, CD57, CK7, and AMACR immunohistochemical staining performed. If the staining pattern is characteristic for metanephric adenoma (CK7-, AMACR-, WT1+, and CD57+, including membranous staining), then no other diagnostic tests are indicated. However, if there is a different immunostaining pattern, then we recommend FISH analysis.

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Diagn Mol Pathol. 1996 Mar;5(1):53-64 PubMed

Mod Pathol. 1996 Mar;9(3):329-33 PubMed

Am J Surg Pathol. 1995 Jun;19(6):615-26 PubMed

Am J Surg Pathol. 1995 Oct;19(10):1101-14 PubMed

Mod Pathol. 2010 Jul;23(7):931-6 PubMed

Histopathology. 2013 May;62(6):941-53 PubMed

Mod Pathol. 2006 Feb;19(2):218-24 PubMed

Mod Pathol. 2003 Oct;16(10):1060-3 PubMed

Pathol Res Pract. 2008;204(10):719-23 PubMed

Cancer. 1995 Aug 15;76(4):669-73 PubMed

Am J Surg Pathol. 2001 Oct;25(10):1290-6 PubMed

Hum Pathol. 2009 Jan;40(1):10-29 PubMed

Clin Cancer Res. 2008 Dec 15;14(24):8087-93 PubMed

Histopathology. 2009 Apr;54(5):516-28 PubMed

Am J Surg Pathol. 2004 Sep;28(9):1117-32 PubMed

Mol Pathol. 1997 Jun;50(3):138-44 PubMed

J Pathol. 1996 Jun;179(2):162-8 PubMed

Am J Surg Pathol. 2008 Dec;32(12):1780-6 PubMed

Mod Pathol. 1997 Nov;10(11):1143-50 PubMed

Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 1991 Jul;3(4):249-55 PubMed

Clin Cancer Res. 2005 Oct 15;11(20):7226-33 PubMed

Am J Surg Pathol. 2013 Aug;37(8):1131-9 PubMed

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...