| 1. |
- Mansour, Mohammed S I, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparison of immunohistochemical mesothelial biomarkers in paired biopsies and effusion cytology cell blocks from pleural mesothelioma
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Cytopathology. - 1365-2303. ; 34:5, s. 456-465
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: Traditionally, the diagnosis of pleural mesothelioma is based on histological material. Minimally invasive effusion cytology specimens are an alternative that, like biopsies, require ancillary analyses. Validation of immunohistochemical (IHC) analyses on cytology, including the surrogate markers for molecular alterations BAP1 and MTAP, is of interest.METHODS: IHC for eight different markers was performed on 59 paired formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded pleural biopsies and pleural effusion cell blocks with mesothelioma. Immunoreactivity in ≥10% of tumour cells was considered positive/preserved. The concordance between histological and cytological materials was assessed.RESULTS: The overall percentage of agreement between the histological epithelioid component in 58 biopsies and paired cell blocks was 93% for calretinin, 98% for CK5, 97% for podoplanin, 90% for WT1, 86% for EMA, 100% for desmin, 91% for BAP1, and 72% for MTAP. For 11 cases with biphasic or sarcomatoid histology, the concordance between cytology and the histological sarcomatoid component was low for calretinin, CK5, and WT1 (all ≤45%). For the whole cohort, loss of both BAP1 and MTAP was seen in 40% while both markers were preserved in 11% of the biopsies for epithelioid histology. The corresponding numbers were 54% and 8%, respectively, for the paired cell blocks.CONCLUSIONS: Generally, a high concordance for IHC staining was seen between paired biopsies and pleural effusion cell blocks from mesotheliomas, but the somewhat lower agreement for WT1, EMA, and especially MTAP calls for further investigation and local quality assurance. The lower concordance for the sarcomatoid subtype for some markers may indicate biological differences.
|
|
| 2. |
- Mansour, Mohammed S. I., et al.
(författare)
-
The impact of different fixatives on immunostaining of lung adenocarcinomas in pleural effusion cell blocks
- 2024
-
Ingår i: CANCER CYTOPATHOLOGY. - 1934-662X .- 1934-6638.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Cell blocks (CBs) are widely used for biomarker analyses such as immunostaining. Although immunohistochemistry on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues is standardized, there are multiple preparation methods and fixatives for cytology. Our objective was to investigate the effect of different common fixatives on the immunoreactivity of pleural effusion CBs with metastatic lung adenocarcinomas. Methods: This prospective study included 24 malignant pleural effusions from different patients with lung adenocarcinoma. From each case, four identical CBs were fixed in 10% neutral buffered formalin, PreservCyt, CytoLyt, and CytoRich Red (only 17 of the cases), respectively. Samples containing <100 malignant cells were excluded. All CBs were stained with thyroid transcription factor 1 (TTF-1; clones 8G7G3/1 and SPT24), napsin A, claudin 4, CEA, CK7, and epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM; clones BS14, Ber-Ep4, and MOC-31). The fraction and intensity of stained cells were evaluated. Results: Of the investigated markers, a significant difference in staining proportion was seen for TTF-1 clone 8G7G3/1 and EpCAM clone MOC-31, especially with cases being negative in CytoLyt (33.3% and 83.3% positive, respectively) and PreservCyt (62.5% and 83.3%) whereas being positive in CytoRich Red (76.5% and 94.1%) and formalin (both 95.8%). A significantly weaker intensity of staining was seen for all alcohol-based fixatives compared to formalin for TTF-1 clone 8G7G3/1, napsin A, and EpCAM clone MOC-31, whereas EpCAM clone Ber-Ep4 was significantly weaker only in PreservCyt compared with formalin. Conclusions: Immunocytochemical expression and concordance with formalin-fixed CBs differ depending on the used fixative as well as the antibody and clone, warranting investigation of the reliability of each biomarker for non-formalin-fixed cytology.
|
|
