The Application of Immunohistochemical Biomarkers in Urologie Surgical Pathology.
Most renal tumors are epithelial neoplasms; clear cell renal cell carcinoma (CRCC), papillary renal cell carcinoma (PRCC), chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (ChRCC), and oncocytoma account for more than 90% of this group of tumors. (1-3) Other uncommon and rare renal epithelial neoplasms include clear cell papillary renal cell carcinoma (CPRCC), mucinous tubular and spindle cell carcinoma, renal medullary carcinoma, collecting duct carcinoma (CDC), tubulocystic renal cell carcinoma, and Xp11 translocation renal cell carcinoma (TRCC). (1-3) Upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UUC) is usually included in the diagnostic consideration. Diagnosis of a renal epithelial neoplasm tends to be straightforward, based on histologic features alone, especially in a nephrectomy specimen. However, histologic subtyping of these renal epithelial tumors and the distinction of an epithelial tumor from a nonepithelial tumor or a metastasis in a limited sample, such as a needle core biopsy or a fine-needle aspiration specimen, can be challenging. In these scenarios, IHC stains may play a crucial role in reaching a definitive diagnosis.
When working on a renal biopsy specimen obtained from a renal mass, in our opinion the following questions should be raised and appropriate diagnostic approaches should be taken: (1) Is this a low-grade renal epithelial neoplasm or a reactive condition, such as reactive tubules in xanthogranulomatous pyelonephritis, interstitial nephritis due to viral infection, malakoplakia, or other benign condition? (2) If this is a renal epithelial tumor, how should one further subtype this tumor? and (3) If this is a neoplastic process, can one exclude a metastasis or a nonepithelial neoplasm? In this portion of the article, we will review and update the most useful immunomarkers and IHC panels, on the basis of the literature and our experience, in attempting to resolve these diagnostic conundrums, with a specific focus on how to classify a renal epithelial neoplasm and how to avoid overutilization or underutilization of the massive number of biomarkers. It should be emphasized here that there are overwhelming numbers of biomarkers reported in the literature, and investigators appear to have their own preference and experience using certain sets of biomarkers. (4-65) As a result, the International Society of Urological Pathology (4) reached no absolute consensus regarding an individual antibody or panel of antibodies to be used for classifying renal tumors or confirming renal metastases.
Low-Grade Epithelial Neoplasm Versus Benign/Reactive Condition
The first question to ask when evaluating a biopsy sample from a renal mass is whether it represents a benign or malignant process. Particularly, is this a low-grade renal epithelial neoplasm or a reactive condition? As a general rule, histologic features such as clear cells, papillary structures, and vascular-rich tissues are clues to suggest a neoplastic process. In contrast, mixed acute and chronic inflammation, atrophic tubules and glomeruli, fibrosis, and granulomas are suggestive of a benign/reactive process. Numerous renal epithelial tumor-associated immunomarkers have been reported in the literature in differentiating subtypes of renal epithelial neoplasms. (4-7) Most of these markers, such as cluster of differentiation (CD) 10, renal cell carcinoma marker (RCCma), [alpha]-methylacyl-CoA racemase (P504S), epithelial membrane antigen (EMA), paired box gene (PAX) 8, PAX2, S100A1, and kidney-specific cadherin (ksp-cad), are also expressed in proximal and/or distal renal tubules as well. Therefore, most of these markers have little value in the distinction of a benign process from a renal epithelial tumor. However, vimentin, carbonic anhydrase IX (CAIX), CD117, and kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1) are not usually expressed in normal renal tubules, with the exception of KIM-1. In the condition of acute tubular injury, KIM-1 is usually expressed in renal proximal tubules. Therefore, if a low-grade CRCC is suspected, staining with CAIX, KIM-1, and vimentin can be performed, and positive staining for these markers will support a diagnosis of malignancy. Table 3 lists the expression of frequently used immunomarkers in 20 cases of benign renal tissues from Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, Pennsylvania.
Differential Diagnosis of Subtypes of Renal Epithelial Neoplasms
Based on the histologic features, renal epithelial neoplasms can be classified into 2 main groups: low nuclear grade (Fuhrman nuclear grades 1 and 2) and high nuclear grade (Fuhrman nuclear grades 3 and 4 or sarcomatoid features). The group of low-grade neoplasms can be further divided into (1) tumors with clear cell/granular cell features; (2) tumors with both clear cell and papillary features; and (3) tumors with papillary features. The specific immunoprofile for each entity is summarized in Figure 1. The common differential diagnosis and the frequently used immunomarkers are summarized in Table 4.
Renal Epithelial Tumor With Clear Cell/Granular Cell Features.--Three main entities are included in this group: low-grade CRCC, ChRCC, and oncocytoma. The useful immunomarkers for the distinction of these 3 entities are listed in Table 5. The staining for cytokeratin (CK) 7 tends to be diffuse (>50% of tumor cells stained) in ChRCC, focal and patchy (<10% of tumor cells stained) in oncocytoma, and negative in CRCC. If a CRCC is diffusely positive for CK7, then a CPRCC should be considered. The nuclear and cytoplasmic staining for S100A1 in oncocytoma can be focal, but it is rarely observed in ChRCC, even focally. Caution should be taken, as S100A1 positivity is frequently seen in CRCC. In our experience, CK7, epithelial cell adhesion molecule (Ber-EP4), S100A1, and CD15 can serve as the initial IHC panel to differentiate a ChRCC from an oncocytoma. If this first IHC panel is inconclusive, additional markers, such as CD82, claudin 7, and claudin 8, can be used. In contrast, coexpression of EMA and vimentin and positivity for CAIX, RCCma, and KIM-1 are the diagnostic panel for CRCCs. Epithelioid angiomyolipoma (AML) with clear cytoplasm is a rare entity and sometimes may present as a mimic. Angiomyolipoma is positive for human melanoma black 45 (HMB-45), melanoma-associated antigen recognized by T cells 1 (Mart-1), and smooth muscle actin (SMA) and negative for CK and other renal cell carcinoma-associated markers such as PAX8/PAX2, CAIX, and RCCma.
Renal Epithelial Tumors With Both Clear Cell and Papillary Features.--The main differential diagnosis for a renal cell tumor with both clear cell and papillary features includes CPRCC, CRCC with papillary features, PRCC (type I) with clear cell features, and TRCC. The useful immunomarkers in differentiating these tumors are summarized in Table 6.
Clear cell papillary renal cell carcinoma is a recently recognized, distinct renal epithelial neoplasm that is more frequently seen in patients with end-stage renal disease. (54,55,66) The key histologic features include papillary structures, tubules, solid and cystic components, all lined by tumor cells with clear cytoplasm, and usually low Fuhrman nuclear grade. (54,55,66) The nuclei tend to be located away from the basement membranes and toward the luminal aspect of the tumor cells, creating subnuclear vacuolization similar to secretory endometrium. (54-56,66) These tumors lack the characteristic molecular features of PRCC and CRCC, including trisomies of chromosomes 7 and 17, deletions of 3p25, von Hippel-Lindau gene (VHL) mutation, and VHL promoter hypermethylation. (54) Immunohistochemically, these tumors are almost always positive for CK7 and CAIX but negative for P504S, CD10, RCCma, and transcription factor E3 (TFE3).54 High-molecular-weight CK (34BE12, CK903) was reported to show positivity in 56% of cases (54) but usually showed negativity in CRCC, PRCC, and TRCC. Interestingly, parafibromin tends to be absent or only weakly expressed in parathyroid carcinoma but showed positivity in 100% of CPRCCs and was also expressed in 7% and 19% of CRCCs and PRCCs, respectively. (54) To complicate this matter further, Williamson et al (53) reported 12 cases of CPRCClike tumors in patients with VHL disease sharing histologic features of sporadic CPRCC; however, 82% of these cases lacked the characteristic immunohistochemical profile of sporadic CPRCC. These tumors were frequently negative or only focally positive for CK7 and showed diffuse CD10 positivity in 64% of the cases and strong P504S staining in 27% of the cases. (53)
In contrast to the IHC profile for CPRCC, CRCC with papillary features is usually positive for EMA, vimentin, CAIX, CD10, and RCCma, and negative for CK7, parafibromin, and 34BE12. In our experience, P504S expression can be seen in approximately 50% of CRCCs. (19) The staining pattern of CAIX in CRCC is circumferential membrane staining of tumor cells, whereas the staining pattern in CPRCC tends to spare the apical surface of the tumor cells and outline the basolateral membranes. (4) Papillary renal cell carcinoma with clear cell features, especially type I, is another key differential diagnosis, which typically shows a low nuclear grade and frequent clear cell changes, in comparison to type II PRCC, with high nuclear grade, an abundant amount of eosinophilic cytoplasm, nuclear stratification, and less frequent clear cell changes. Type I PRCC is usually diffusely positive for CK7, P504S, and focally positive for CAIX and CD10. An example of type I PRCC with clear cell features on a small-needle core biopsy specimen is shown in Figure 2, A through D. A reliable IHC panel in the distinction of type I PRCC from type II PRCC is not available yet; however, type II PRCC is frequently negative or only focally positive for CK7, strongly and diffusely positive for P504S, and can be positive for CK20.
The TRCC group of rare renal neoplasms predominately arises in pediatric patients with chromosomal translocation involving the TFE3 transcription factor gene located at 11p11.2 locus or the TFEB gene at 6p21. (6,7,55,58) Based on a study of 443 consecutive nephrectomies from a single institution, the incidence of TRCC in adults has been reported as 1.6%.57 The typical morphologic features include papillary and nested structures lined by clear to granular cells with voluminous cytoplasm, hyaline material, and psammoma bodies. (58) Immunohistochemically, the tumor cells are positive for TFE3, cathepsin K, HMB-45, Mart-1, P504S, RCCma, and PAX8, only focally positive for CAIX, and usually negative for epithelial markers including cytokeratin AE1/3 (AE1/3), EMA, and CK7. (55)
Renal Epithelial Tumors With Papillary Features.--There is significant overlapping of the immunostaining profiles of PRCC and mucinous tubular and spindle cell carcinoma. (6) The distinction between these 2 entities should primarily rely on histologic features. In contrast, metanephric adenoma is usually positive for S100, Wilms tumor 1 (WT1), and CD57 and negative for renal cell carcinoma-associated markers, such as P504S and RCCma. (20,33) The useful immunomarkers for distinguishing these 3 entities are summarized in Table 7.
Differential Diagnosis of High-Grade Renal Epithelial Tumors
The main diagnostic considerations for a high-grade renal epithelial neoplasm include high-grade CRCC, high-grade PRCC (type II), sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma, UUC, CDC, renal medullary carcinoma, TRCC, and metastasis. The useful markers for this differential diagnosis are summarized in Tables 8 and 9. Carvalho and colleagues67 suggested that p63, CK7, PAX8, and integrase interactor 1 (INI-1) comprised an optimal IHC panel to differentiate poorly differentiated urothelial carcinoma from other high-grade renal epithelial tumors. Their study demonstrated that (1) all urothelial carcinomas (N = 18) were positive for p63, 15 of 18 (83%) were negative for PAX8, 94% were positive for both CK7 and 34BE12, and all were positive for INI-1; and (2) all CDC cases were negative for p63, and 5 of 6 were positive for PAX8. (67) The study by Albadine et al (67) concluded that 100% of CDCs (N = 21) were positive for PAX8, and only 14% were positive for p63; whereas 97% of UUCs (N = 34) were positive for p63, and only 8.8% were positive for PAX8. Loss of INI-1 expression in nearly 100% of renal medullary carcinoma cases has been well documented in many studies. (61,62,67) Interestingly, octamer-binding transcription factor 3/4 (OCT3/4) expression has been demonstrated in 10 of 14 renal medullary carcinoma cases (71%) but was negative in 5 of 5 CDC cases and 10 of 10 UUC cases. (60) Chang et al (59) reported PAX8 expression in 69% (31 of 45) of sarcomatoid renal cell carcinomas and only in 4% (2 of 45) of sarcomatoid urothelial carcinomas of the bladder, whereas 18% (2 of 11) of sarcomatoid urothelial carcinomas of the upper urinary tract were positive for PAX8, showing some overlapping staining features with sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma. (59)
Epithelial Neoplasm Versus Nonepithelial Neoplasm
Angiomyolipoma is the most common nonepithelial renal neoplasm, and a classic one that can be easily diagnosed by its histologic features of mixed components of spindle cells, adipose tissue, and hyalinized blood vessels. An epithelioid angiomyolipoma with clear cell features may potentially pose a diagnostic challenge; however, a panel of IHC markers such as SMA, HMB-45, Mart-1, and CK is helpful in reaching a definitive diagnosis. Small round cell neoplasms can present as a primary renal tumor, including neuroendocrine carcinoma, Ewing sarcoma/primitive neuroectodermal tumor, neuroblastoma, lymphoma, plasmacytomas, and myeloid sarcoma. We recently encountered a case of primary precursor B-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma with a focal bone metastasis in a 4-year-old boy. The tumor mimicked Ewing sarcoma/primitive neuroectodermal tumor both morphologically and immunohistochemically. Figure 3, A through F, demonstrates the tumor cells to be positive for CD99, Friend leukemia virus integration 1 (Fli-1), PAX5, CD10, and terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase (TdT) and to have a markedly increased mindbomb homolog 1 (MIB-1/Ki-67) proliferative index (not shown).
Primary Renal Epithelial Tumor Versus Metastasis
Metastasis in the kidney is rare; the most common site of origin of a metastatic carcinoma to the kidney is lung, including adenocarcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and small cell carcinoma. Other sites of origin may include colon, breast, gastrointestinal tract, pancreatobiliary tract, melanoma, and ovary. Adrenal cortical carcinoma may be a direct invasion or a metastasis. Steroidogenic factor 1 (SF-1) is a recently described, orphan member of the nuclear hormone receptor superfamily, which plays a crucial role in the differentiation of steroidogenic tissue. SF-1 has been reported to show positivity in 100% of adrenal cortical adenomas and 90% of adrenal cortical carcinomas and negativity in PRCC, ChRCC, and oncocytoma. (64) Only 3 of 20 CRCC cases showed focal positivity, with less than 10% of tumor cells stained. (64) All adrenal cortical neoplasms were negative for EMA, whereas most renal cell carcinomas were positive. (64) Another study by Sangoi and colleagues (65) demonstrated that SF-1 expression was seen in 86% of adrenal cortical neoplasms (N = 54) and none of 185 metastatic CRCCs.
Expression of KIM-1, PAX8, and EMA was observed in 83%, 83%, and 78% of CRCCs, respectively. (65) In contrast, all 54 adrenal cortical neoplasms were negative for these 3 markers. (65) A small percentage of CRCCs can be positive for calretinin, inhibin-a, and Melan-A; whereas a small per centage of adrenal cortical neoplasms can be positive for CD10, CK, and CAIX. (65) SF-1, EMA, PAX8/or KIM-1/or pVHL are the optimal initial IHC panel to differentiate these 2 entities. (46,64,65) The useful diagnostic markers for metastasis in the kidney are summarized in Table 9.
In this section, we focus on lesions that may pose a diagnostic dilemma in cystoscopic biopsy material that is often scant, superficial, fragmented, or compromised by cautery artifact. Immunohistochemistry can be a valuable aid; however, it does not replace careful evaluation of morphology, including any normal urothelium that may be present.
Normal Urothelium and Flat Lesions
Evaluation of urothelial lesions presents a unique problem, as common immunohistochemical markers exhibit staining patterns specific to particular compartments within normal urothelium. Familiarity with staining in normal histology is key to understanding how changes in the normal staining pattern correlate to various conditions in the morphologic spectrum of changes seen in reactive processes, hyperplasia, dysplasia, and carcinoma. Normal urothelium is 4 to 7 cells in thickness and consists of a layer of basal cells, 2 to 5 layers of intermediate cells, and a layer of superficial umbrella cells. Cystoscopic biopsies of a flat urothelial lesion can be problematic and immunohistochemistry can be quite helpful if morphologic evaluation alone is insufficient. We recommend a panel that includes CK20, CD44, p53, and Ki-67. Compartmental staining patterns of normal urothelium and flat lesions are summarized in Table 10 (68-83) and illustrated in Figure 4, A through F.
Nephrogenic Adenoma and Its Mimickers
Several lesions can have an exophytic papillary or polypoid cystoscopic appearance, including papillary urothelial neoplasms, polypoid cystitis, and nephrogenic adenoma. Although nephrogenic adenomas occur most commonly in the bladder, they may also develop in the renal pelvis, ureters, and urethra. If the lesion has a polypoid or papillary growth pattern, the differential diagnoses may include papillary urothelial neoplasms and polypoid cystitis; however, nephrogenic adenomas may also exhibit tubular, cystic, and solid histologic pattern, broadening the differential diagnosis to include prostatic adenocarcinoma, ectopic prostatic tissue, and clear cell adenocarcinoma of the bladder. Immunohistochemistry can help differentiate between these various lesions, and the pertinent markers are summarized in Table 11. (82,84-96)
Invasive Urothelial Carcinoma With Variant Histology
Variants of invasive urothelial carcinoma present a challenge, as many cystoscopic biopsies contain very limited material and may not show urothelial dysplasia or an invasive carcinoma with a more classic appearance. Invasive urothelial carcinoma may show a micropapillary pattern similar to that seen in carcinomas from other primary sites, as well as epithelioid mesothelioma. Table 12 summarizes markers useful in this differential. (50,97-107) Similarly, the plasmacytoid variant of invasive urothelial carcinoma can be confused with plasmacytoma, adenocarcinomas, and other tumors. Table 13 summarizes the markers we recommend for this morphologic pattern. (50,108-114) The nested variant of invasive urothelial carcinoma can be difficult to distinguish from a benign proliferation of von Brunn nests, as well as tumors exhibiting a nested pattern such as paraganglioma, carcinoid, and melanoma. There is great overlap in the immunohistochemical staining pattern of these entities, particularly between paraganglioma and carcinoid tumors where presence or absence of S100-positive sustentacular cells may be the only clue. These stains are not particularly helpful to distinguish between urothelial carcinoma and von Brunn nests, unless the lesion is a carcinoma and diffuse positivity for CK20 and increased Ki-67 expression is present; otherwise, negative or weak CK20 staining and low Ki-67 expression can be indicative of either entity. Markers for tumors with a nested morphology are summarized in Table 14. (115-125)
Adenocarcinoma in the Bladder
The primary question when an adenocarcinoma is discovered in the bladder is whether or not it is a primary neoplasm, or has spread to the bladder either by direct extension or metastasis. Table 15 offers a basic immunohistochemical panel to differentiate primary bladder adenocarcinoma from other adenocarcinomas that commonly spread to the bladder, as well as conventional urothelial carcinoma and clear cell renal cell carcinoma. * Nephrogenic adenoma may also be included in the differential diagnosis and is covered in Table 11.
Spindle Cell Neoplasms in the Bladder
Spindle cell lesions are uncommon in the bladder; however, they present a difficult diagnostic group in cystoscopic biopsies where the primary consideration is a sarcomatoid urothelial carcinoma versus a mesenchymal tumor. The differential diagnosis of mesenchymal neoplasms is further clouded by lack of a standard classification scheme in the urothelial tract, in part because of their rarity. The markers useful in the differential of spindle cell neoplasms are summarized in Table 16. (72,82,139-150) We prefer the term inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor, which encompasses a variety of terms in the literature, including inflammatory pseudotumor, pseudosarcomatous myofibroblastic tumor, inflammatory pseudosarcomatous fibromyxoid tumor, and fibromyxoid pseudotumor; this term is reflective of the low-grade nature of this lesion and does not incite the same alarm and confusion as the terms that include pseudosarcoma.
The diagnosis of prostate carcinoma is largely achieved by histomorphologic assessment on routine hematoxylin-eosin sections of prostate surgical specimens. One of the key diagnostic criteria for malignancy is the absence of basal cells. The identification of basal cells on a hematoxylin-eosin section of core needle biopsies is not always straightforward; some artifacts may make this task challenging. (151) Immunohistochemistry using antibodies against basal cells is an objective and reliable tool to demonstrate the presence or absence of basal cells. However, the lack of basal cells in isolation is not diagnostic of malignancy, since benign mimics can show false-negative reactivity. A number of studies have identified biomarkers that are overexpressed in prostate carcinoma and their precursor. The application of cancer overexpressed biomarkers in conjunction with basal cell markers provide additional confidence in making a definitive diagnosis of prostate cancer in challenging cases. In addition, the differential considerations between urothelial and prostatic origin arise occasionally, especially in transurethral resection specimens. Under those circumstances, immunohistochemistry becomes a valuable aid in reaching an accurate diagnosis. The commonly used immunomarkers in prostate surgical pathology include ones aiding in the diagnosis of malignancy and others defining prostate organ specificity.
Immunomarkers That Aid in the Diagnosis of Malignancy
Two groups of biomarkers are used to aid in the diagnosis of prostate carcinoma on core needle biopsy specimens. The first group is composed of basal cell markers in which a negative immunoreaction indicates malignancy. The second group consists of upregulated biomarkers in which a positive immunoreaction suggests malignancy.
Basal Cell Markers.--p63, a cloned homologue of the p53 tumor suppressor gene, is a nuclear protein involved in the regulation of growth and development in epithelium of various tissues including prostate. (152) Anti-p63 labels the p63 protein in the nuclei of basal or progenitor cells in a variety of epithelia, serving as a basal cell marker with a nuclear staining pattern in prostate surgical pathology. (152) Many studies concluded that the absence of p63 stain indicates prostate carcinoma.153-157 Thus, the application of p63 immunostain is essential when confronting challenging cases. However, aberrant diffuse p63 expression in prostatic carcinomas had been reported. (158-160) In the study of Osunkoya et al, (158) 21 cases of prostatic carcinomas revealed aberrant diffuse expression of p63 (100% of cancer cells in 19 of 21; 75% in 2 of 21); all were negative for highmolecular-weight cytokeratin (HMWCK, or CK903), positive for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and P504S. A few reports (161,162) also documented false-positive p63 staining in prostate cancers with a basal cell distribution. Although aberrant expression of p63 is rare, caution should be exercised when working on cases with equivocal features.
HMWCK (CK903, clone 340E12) is a well-known basal cell marker. Gown and Vogel (163) investigated the expression of monoclonal antibodies generated against different human intermediate filament proteins in a variety of human normal and neoplastic tissue in 1984; they first described the staining pattern of antibody 34PE12 in prostate as being basal glandular epithelial cells only in distribution. Thereafter, CK903 was studied extensively in normal and neoplastic prostatic tissues, validating its diagnostic utility as a differentiating immunomarker between benign and malignant process, with the lack of basal cell staining being an indicator of malignancy. (163-167) However, lack of basal cell staining is also noted in 5% to 23% of benign prostatic glands. (151,154,165,168) Googe et al (166) and Yang et al (167) reported focal patchy immunoreactivity (nonbasal cell distribution) for basal cell markers (especially HMWCK) in high-grade prostatic carcinomas. Thus, Epstein (151) advised that negative basal cell staining in small glandular (and other) prostatic lesions is supportive of a diagnosis of prostatic carcinoma only in the appropriate hematoxylin-eosin context. CK5/6, another HMWCK, is expressed in basal cells. A few studies evaluated CK5/6 expression in various prostate normal, benign, and neoplastic tissues, suggesting superior sensitivity and reliability of CK5/6 compared with CK903. (169,170)
Markers Overexpressed in Prostate Cancer.--P504S, the gene encoding [alpha]-methylacyl-coenzyme A racemase (AMACR), was first reported by Xu et al (171) in 2000. By using complementary DNA (cDNA) library subtraction in conjunction with high-throughput microarray screening techniques, they found that P504S is overexpressed in prostate carcinomas, while low or undetectable in normal prostatic tissues. In 2001, Jiang et al (172) found 100% cases of prostate carcinomas expressing P504S regardless of Gleason score, with positive staining defined as continuous, dark cytoplasmic staining or apical granular staining that can be observed easily at low-power magnification. In contrast, 88% of the benign prostatic tissue was negative for P504; only 12% showed focal, weak reactivity. Subsequently, P504S expres sion was evaluated in a variety of benign and neoplastic prostatic tissues, (173-179) demonstrating that P504S is overexpressed in prostate carcinoma and high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN), with a reported sensitivity in the range of 62% to 100%; the staining patterns were variable, from diffuse and strong (most reports) to focal and weak. (162) By comparison, variants of prostate carcinoma showed lower sensitivity, including 62% to 68% (180) and 72% (179) for foamy gland carcinoma; 83% (181) and 70% to 77% (180) for pseudohyperplastic carcinoma; and 67% for atrophic carcinoma. (182) A few studies (181,183,184) investigated P504S expression in postradiation-therapy prostate carcinomas and reported a positive rate of 80% to 100%. The benign atypical glands in postradiation-therapy prostate were P504S negative. Their findings suggested the diagnostic utility of P504S immunostaining in distinction between postradiation prostate carcinoma and radiation-induced atypia in benign prostatic epithelium.
Although benign prostate glands usually lack P504S expression, positive immunoreactivity for P504S was described by several investigators in partial atrophy, atypical adenomatous hyperplasia, and nephrogenic adenoma (NA). Partial atrophy is the most common benign mimicker of prostate carcinoma on core needle biopsy. Wang et al (185) evaluated P504S and basal cell expression in 198 cases of partial atrophy and found P504S expression in 69.2% of cases, and positive basal cells in 68.7% that showed a focal patchy staining pattern. Herawi et al (186) reported patchy basal staining in 87% of partial atrophy foci and P504S positivity in 79% of cases. Atypical adenomatous hyperplasia is another well-known mimicker of prostate carcinoma. Yang et al (187) reported P504S expression in 17.5% cases of atypical adenomatous hyperplasia, while Skinnider et al (86) reported 14%. The reported expression of P504S in nephrogenic adenoma ranges from 58% to 100%, and most nephrogenic adenomas were also CK903 negative. (86,188,189) The similarity in certain morphologic features and the P504S+/CK903- immunoprofile of nephrogenic adenoma make the distinction between prostate carcinoma from nephrogenic adenoma challenging. Additional immunomarkers, especially PSA, PAX2 (or PAX8), and CK7 can help to differentiate nephrogenic adenoma from prostate carcinoma. Nephrogenic adenoma is usually negative, or only focally and weakly reactive to PSA, and positive for CK7 as well as PAX2, (95,173,190) while prostate carcinoma expresses PSA and is nonreactive to CK7 and PAX2 (see Figure 5, A through H).
P504S is upregulated in prostate carcinomas and HGPIN, and can serve as a positive tissue marker; however, by itself, P504S positivity is not specific as it may also be expressed in benign mimickers such as atypical adenomatous hyperplasia and nephrogenic adenoma. Jiang et al (179) suggested using a positive P504S marker along with a negative basal cell-specific marker, such as CK903 and/or p63, to help confirm the diagnosis when small atypical glands are seen. Zhou et al (156) reported that a basal cell cocktail (CK903 plus p63) improves the detection of prostate basal cells. Browne et al (191) prospectively stained 123 cases with a basal cell cocktail and P504s; the immunostain results contributed to rendering a final diagnosis in 70% of cases. They suggest that combining P504s and the basal cell cocktail on a single slide would be superior to using either marker separately. Currently, an antibody cocktail composed of P504S, CK903, and p63 is routinely used.
ERG, a transcription factor in the erythroblastosis virus E26 transforming sequence (ETS) family known to be expressed in endothelial cells, is overexpressed in subsets of prostate carcinoma, acute myeloid leukemia, and Ewing sarcoma. A number of studies evaluated ERG expression by immunohistochemistry in benign and neoplastic prostatic tissues, reporting a positive rate of 38% to 45% in prostate carcinoma, 22% to 29% in HGPIN, and rare expression in benign glands. (192-196) In nonprostatic tumors, ERG expression is exclusively identified in vascular tumors, 70% of extramedullary myeloid tumors, 7% of Ewing sarcomas, and rare large cell undifferentiated pulmonary carcinoma, as well as mesothelioma. (192,194) Those data suggest that ERG is highly specific for prostate carcinoma, in addition to vascular tumors, extramedullary myeloid tumors, and rare Ewing sarcoma, but has low sensitivity. Its utility in the differential between benign mimics and prostate carcinoma on core needle biopsies may be limited. However, the high specificity for prostate carcinoma may prove to be of value in the identification of prostate primary cancer when working on tumors of unknown origin.
Immunomarkers Used in Identification of Prostate Primary Tumor
Prostate-specific antigen and prostate-specific acid phosphatase (PSAP) are 2 well-known prostate tissue-specific immunomarkers, and both are highly sensitive and relatively specific; however, their expression in nonprostatic tissues has been reported, including melanoma, breast carcinoma, and salivary ductal carcinoma. (162,197-202) It had been documented that poorly differentiated prostate carcinomas express less PSA and PSAP than benign prostatic tissue and low-grade prostate carcinomas. The reported sensitivities range from 25% to 35% when using monoclonal antibody and approximately 95% when using polyclonal antibody. (133,162,203,204) We evaluated PSA expression (using both monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies) in 133 cases of prostate carcinoma (low-intermediate grade: 97; high grade: 36) and 909 cases of nonprostatic tumors from a broad spectrum of human tissues and demonstrated the following: (1) PSA expression is identified in 100% cases of prostate carcinoma with both antibodies; the staining intensity is stronger for polyclonal antibody than monoclonal antibody; (2) No difference can be appreciated when comparing different grades of prostate carcinoma; (3) PSA expression in nonprostatic tumors is 1.3% (12 of 909) when using polyclonal antibody and 1.1% when using monoclonal antibody. The positive cases are 1 of 20 papillary renal cell carcinomas (focal, weak), 1 of 74 breast invasive ductal carcinomas (focal, moderate), and 10 of 93 for polyclonal antibody and 8 of 93 for monoclonal antibody in melanoma (focal, weak). Our data showed a PSA sensitivity of 100%, and specificity of 98.7%.194
P501S, or prostein, is a 553-amino-acid protein identified by cDNA library subtraction followed by high-throughput microarray screening technique. (205) Prostein (P501S) messenger RNA and protein expression are prostate specific, restricted to both normal and malignant prostate tissue; all other nonprostatic normal or malignant tissues lack prostein expression. (205,206) Sheridan et al (207) immunohistochemically evaluated prostein expression in 20 cases of primary prostate carcinoma, 20 cases of normal prostate tissue, and 69 cases of metastatic prostate carcinoma, finding prostein expression in 100% of primary prostate carcinomas and normal prostate tissue, and 99% of metastatic prostate carcinomas. They described the staining pattern as perinuclear cytoplasmic (Golgi) in distribution. Yin et al (208) found that 100% of benign prostate tissue, 94.1% of primary prostate carcinomas, and 87% of metastatic prostate carcinomas were immunoreactive to prostein. Both studies also examined PSA expression, showing similar staining results. The data, although limited, suggest the potential utility of prostein as a prostate-specific marker in the detection of metastatic prostate carcinoma.
NKX3.1 is a prostate-specific homeobox gene located on chromosome band 8p21. In human normal and neoplastic tissues, NKX3.1 expression is highly specific, restricted to prostate, testis, and breast with a nuclear staining pattern as illustrated in Figure 6, A and B. (209-211) Gelmann et al (210) evaluated the expression of NKX3.1 in 4061 samples encompassing a broad spectrum of human cancers and normal tissues and found that NKX3.1 is expressed primarily in benign and malignant prostatic epithelial cells, but also normal testis, 5% to 9% of breast invasive ductal carcinomas, and 26% to 27% of breast invasive lobular carcinomas. Chuang et al (133) evaluated the sensitivity of prostate-specific immunomarkers, including PSA, prostein (P501S), prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA), NKX3.1, and proPSA (pPSA) on 38 poorly differentiated prostate carcinomas and 35 high-grade invasive urothelial carcinomas. They found the sensitivities for labeling prostate carcinoma were 97.4% for PSA, 100% for P501S, 92.1% for PSMA, 94.7% for NKX3.1, and 94.7% for pPSA. Thus, they suggested using PSA as the first screening marker in differentiating high-grade prostate carcinoma from high-grade urothelial carcinoma; other markers are useful when PSA shows negative or equivocal staining. Gurel et al (209) evaluated the expression of NKX3.1, PAS, and PSAP in 69 cases of metastatic prostate carcinomas and 349 cases representing a variety of nonprostatic tumors. The sensitivity for identifying metastatic prostatic adenocarcinomas overall was 98.6% for NKX3.1, 94.2% for PSA, and 98.6% for PSAP. The specificity of NKX3.1 was 99.7% (1 of 349 nonprostatic tumors positive). The sole positive nonprostatic cancer case was an invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. The available limited data suggest that NKX3.1 is a highly sensitive and relatively specific tissue marker for prostate carcinoma and may have utility in identification of prostate origin when working on tumors of unknown primary.
Testicular tumors account for only 1% of all tumors, so they are relatively rare for many pathologists and may present a significant diagnostic challenge. Most testicular tumors occurring at any age are germ cell tumors (GCTs). Approximately 50% of GCTs in adults are pure classic seminomas, but approximately 30% will be mixed GCTs. Each component in mixed GCTs may exhibit multiple morphologic patterns, creating additional challenges. The histologic patterns of GCTs often overlap with those of sex cord-stromal tumors (SCSTs), and some tumors may have both germ cell and sex cord-stromal components to further complicate matters. Identifying all components of a testicular tumor is critical for patient management, as the various components may or may not respond to radiation or chemotherapy. (1,212) The newer stem cell markers, such as SALL4, OCT4, and Nanog, are particularly useful in identification of GCTs. Immunomarkers useful in the differential identification of GCTs are presented in Table 172 (13-255) and illustrated in Figure 7, A through F. Markers that are helpful in distinguishing between GCTs and SCSTs are presented in Table 18. (212,232,252,256) We recommend an initial panel consisting of sal-like 4 (SALL4), placental-like alkaline phosphatase (PLAP), inhibin [alpha], and calretinin to differentiate between GCTs and SCSTs; if all 4 markers show negativity, then other neoplasms such as adenocarcinomas, melanoma, or lymphoma should be considered. Markers useful in the identification of SCSTs are included in Table 19 (217,256-280) and a typical pattern of SF-1 expression is illustrated in Figure 8.
Tumors of the paratesticular structures are rare and it can be difficult to distinguish the primary site of origin and whether or not the tumor is primary to the paratesticular structures, or metastatic from the abdomen or pelvis. The distinction between epithelial or mesothelial origin is also problematic in these tumors. Markers that may help in the distinction of primary epithelial neoplasms of the rete testis and epididymis, as well as mesothelial neoplasms, are presented in Table 20. (217,256,281-302) If the tumor in this region appears to be metastatic, Table 21 lists markers that may help in the identification of adenocarcinomas occurring in the male pelvis. ([dagger])
Immunohistochemisty has broad diagnostic applications in genitourinary pathology and is a useful adjunct to morphology in difficult cases. It can be applied to benign and malignant neoplasms, but this must be done in the context of comparing to expression of these markers in normal tissues.
Please Note: Illustration(s) are not available due to copyright restrictions.
(1.) Eble JN, Sauter G, Epstein JI, Sesterhenn IA. Pathology and Genetics of Tumours of the Urinary System and Male Genital Organs. Lyon, France: IARC Press; 2004. World Health Organization Classification of Tumours; vol 7.
(2.) Murphy WM, Grignon DJ, Perlman EJ. Tumors of the Kidney Bladder, and Related Urinary Structures. Washington, DC: American Registry of Pathology; 2004. AFIP Atlas of Tumor Pathology; 4th series, fascicle 1.
(3.) MacLennan GT, Cheng L. Neoplasms of the kidney. In: Bostwick DG, Chen L, eds. Urologic Surgical Pathology. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier; 2008:77-172.
(4.) Tan PH, Cheng L, Rioux-Leclercq N, et al. Renal tumors: diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers. Am J Surg Pathol. 2013; 37(10):1518-1531.
(5.) Lin F, Yang XJ. Kidney. In: Lin F, Prichard JW, Liu H, Wilkerson ML, Schuerch C, eds. Handbook of Practical Immunohistochemistry: Frequently Asked Questions. New York, NY: Springer; 2011:335-354.
(6.) Truong LD, Shen SS. Immunohistochemical diagnosis of renal neoplasms. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2011; 135(1):92-109.
(7.) Goyal R, Gersbach E, Yang XJ, Rohan SM. Differential diagnosis of renal tumors with clear cytoplasm: clinical relevance of renal tumor subclassification in the era of targeted therapies and personalized medicine. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013; 137(4):467-480.
(8.) Skinnider BF, Amin MB. An immunohistochemical approach to the differential diagnosis of renal tumors. Semin Diagn Pathol. 2005; 22(1):51-68.
(9.) Kim MK, Kim S. Immunohistochemical profile of common epithelial neoplasms arising in the kidney. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2002; 10(4):332-338.
(10.) Skinnider BF, Folpe AL, Hennigar RA, et al. Distribution of cytokeratins and vimentin in adult renal neoplasms and normal renal tissue: potential utility of a cytokeratin antibody panel in the differential diagnosis of renal tumors. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005; 29(6):747-754.
(11.) Kobayashi N, Matsuzaki O, Shirai S, Aoki I, Yao M, Nagashima Y. Collecting duct carcinoma of the kidney: an immunohistochemical evaluation of the use of antibodies for differential diagnosis. Hum Pathol. 2008; 39(9):1350-1359.
(12.) Haitel A, Susani M, Wick N, Mazal PR, Wrba F. c-kit overexpression in chromophobe renal cell carcinoma is not associated with c-kit mutation of exons 9 and 11. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005; 29(6):842.
(13.) Huo L, Sugimura J, Tretiakova MS, et al. C-kit expression in renal oncocytomas and chromophobe renal cell carcinomas. Hum Pathol. 2005; 36(3): 262-268.
(14.) Memeo L, Jhang J, Assaad AM, et al. Immunohistochemical analysis for cytokeratin 7, KIT, and PAX2: value in the differential diagnosis of chromophobe cell carcinoma. Am J Clin Pathol. 2007; 127(2):225-229.
(15.) Pan CC, Chen PC, Chiang H. Overexpression of KIT (CD117) in chromophobe renal cell carcinoma and renal oncocytoma. Am J Clin Pathol. 2004; 121(6):878-883.
(16.) Went P, Dirnhofer S, Salvisberg T, et al. Expression of epithelial cell adhesion molecule (EpCam) in renal epithelial tumors. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005; 29(1):83-88.
(17.) Lin F, Zhang PL, Yang XJ, et al. Human kidney injury molecule-1 (hKIM-1): a useful immunohistochemical marker for diagnosing renal cell carcinoma and ovarian clear cell carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007; 31(3):371-381.
(18.) Jiang Z, Fanger GR, Woda BA, et al. Expression of alpha-methylacyl-CoA racemase (P504s) in various malignant neoplasms and normal tissues: a study of 761 cases. Hum Pathol. 2003; 34(8):792-796.
(19.) Lin F, Brown RE, Shen T, Yang XJ, Schuerch C. Immunohistochemical detection of P504S in primary and metastatic renal cell carcinomas. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2004; 12(2):153-159.
(20.) Azabdaftari G, Alroy J, Banner BF, Ucci A, Bhan I, Cheville JC. S100 protein expression distinguishes metanephric adenomas from other renal neoplasms. Pathol Res Pract. 2008; 204(10):719-723.
(21.) Li G, Barthelemy A, Feng G, et al. S100A1: a powerful marker to differentiate chromophobe renal cell carcinoma from renal oncocytoma. Histopathology. 2007; 50(5):642-647.
(22.) Rocca PC, Brunelli M, Gobbo S, et al. Diagnostic utility of S100A1 expression in renal cell neoplasms: an immunohistochemical and quantitative RT-PCR study. Mod Pathol. 2007; 20(7):722-728.
(23.) Daniel L, Lechevallier E, Giorgi R, et al. Pax-2 expression in adult renal tumors. Hum Pathol. 2001; 32(3):282-287.
(24.) Gokden N, Gokden M, Phan DC, McKenney JK. The utility of PAX-2 in distinguishing metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma from its morphologic mimics: an immunohistochemical study with comparison to renal cell carcinoma marker. Am J Surg Pathol. 2008; 32(10):1462-1467.
(25.) Mazal PR, Stichenwirth M, Koller A, Blach S, Haitel A, Susani M. Expression of aquaporins and PAX-2 compared to CD10 and cytokeratin 7 in renal neoplasms: a tissue microarray study. Mod Pathol. 2005; 18(4):535-540.
(26.) Dorai T, Sawczuk IS, Pastorek J, Wiernik PH, Dutcher JP. The role of carbonic anhydrase IX overexpression in kidney cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2005; 41(18):2935-2947.
(27.) Avery AK, Beckstead J, Renshaw AA, Corless CL. Use of antibodies to RCC and CD10 in the differential diagnosis of renal neoplasms. Am J Surg Pathol. 2000; 24(2):203-210.
(28.) Camparo P, Vasiliu V, Molinie V, et al. Renal translocation carcinomas: clinicopathologic, immunohistochemical, and gene expression profiling analysis of 31 cases with a review of the literature. Am J Surg Pathol. 2008; 32(5):656-670.
(29.) Chu P, Arber DA. Paraffin-section detection of CD10 in 505 nonhematopoietic neoplasms: frequent expression in renal cell carcinoma and endometrial stromal sarcoma. Am J Clin Pathol. 2000; 113(3):374-382.
(30.) Pan CC, Chen PC, Ho DM. 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 cases. Histopathology. 2004; 45(5):452-459.
(31.) Paner GP, Srigley JR, Radhakrishnan A, et al. Immunohistochemical analysis of mucinous tubular and spindle cell carcinoma and papillary renal cell carcinoma of the kidney: significant immunophenotypic overlap warrants diagnostic caution. Am J Surg Pathol. 2006; 30(1):13-19.
(32.) Shen SS, Ro JY, Tamboli P, et al. Mucinous tubular and spindle cell carcinoma of kidney is probably a variant of papillary renal cell carcinoma with spindle cell features. Ann Diagn Pathol. 2007; 11(1):13-21.
(33.) Olgac S, Hutchinson B, Tickoo SK, Reuter VE. Alpha-methylacyl-CoA racemase as a marker in the differential diagnosis of metanephric adenoma. Mod Pathol. 2006; 19(2):218-224.
(34.) Zhou M, Roma A, Magi-Galluzzi C. The usefulness of immunohistochemical markers in the differential diagnosis of renal neoplasms. Clin Lab Med. 2005; 25(2):247-257.
(35.) McGregor DK, Khurana KK, Cao C, et al. Diagnosing primary and metastatic renal cell carcinoma: the use of the monoclonal antibody 'Renal Cell Carcinoma Marker'. Am J Surg Pathol. 2001; 25(12):1485-1492.
(36.) Liu L, Qian J, Singh H, Meiers I, Zhou X, Bostwick DG. Immunohistochemical analysis of chromophobe renal cell carcinoma, renal oncocytoma, and clear cell carcinoma: an optimal and practical panel for differential diagnosis. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2007; 131(8):1290-1297.
(37.) Adley BP, Papavero V, Sugimura J, Teh BT, Yang XJ. Diagnostic value of cytokeratin 7 and parvalbumin in differentiating chromophobe renal cell carcinoma from renal oncocytoma. Anal Quant Cytol Histol. 2006; 28(4):228-236.
(38.) Martignoni G, Pea M, Chilosi M, et al. Parvalbumin is constantly expressed in chromophobe renal carcinoma. Mod Pathol. 2001; 14(8):760-767.
(39.) Young AN, Amin MB, Moreno CS, et al. Expression profiling of renal epithelial neoplasms: a method for tumor classification and discovery of diagnostic molecular markers. Am J Pathol. 2001; 158(5):1639-1651.
(40.) Shen SS, Krishna B, Chirala R, Amato RJ, Truong LD. Kidney-specific cadherin, a specific marker for the distal portion of the nephron and related renal neoplasms. Mod Pathol. 2005; 18(7):933-940.
(41.) Mazal PR, Exner M, Haitel A, et al. Expression of kidney-specific cadherin distinguishes chromophobe renal cell carcinoma from renal oncocytoma. Hum Pathol. 2005; 36(1):22-28.
(42.) Adley BP, Gupta A, Lin F, Luan C, Teh BT, Yang XJ. Expression of kidneyspecific cadherin in chromophobe renal cell carcinoma and renal oncocytoma. Am I Clin Pathol. 2006; 126(1):79-85.
(43.) Young AN, de Oliveira Salles PG, Lim SD, et al. Beta defensin-1, parvalbumin, and vimentin: a panel of diagnostic immunohistochemical markers for renal tumors derived from gene expression profiling studies using cDNA microarrays. Am I Surg Pathol. 2003; 27(2):199-205.
(44.) Javed R, Zhai QJ, Shen SS, Krishman B, Ro JY, Truong LD. PAX-8 is a specific marker for renal neoplasms: comparison with PAX-2, renal cell carcinoma marker antigen (RCCM) and kidney specific cadherin (KSP). Mod Pathol. 2009; 22(1S):174A.
(45.) Osunkoya AO, Cohen C, Lawson D, Picken MM, Amin MB, Young AN. Claudin-7 and claudin-8: immunohistochemical markers for the differential diagnosis of chromophobe renal cell carcinoma and renal oncocytoma. Hum Pathol. 2009; 40(2):206-210.
(46.) Lin F, Shi J, Liu H, et al. Immunohistochemical detection of the von Hippel-Lindau gene product (pVHL) in human tissues and tumors: a useful marker for metastatic renal cell carcinoma and clear cell carcinoma of the ovary and uterus. Am I Clin Pathol. 2008; 129(4):592-605.
(47.) Kim SS, Choi YD, Jin XM, et al. Immunohistochemical stain for cytokeratin 7, S100A1 and claudin 8 is valuable in differential diagnosis of chromophobe renal cell carcinoma from renal oncocytoma. Histopathology. 2009; 54(5):633-635.
(48.) Lin F, Shi J, Yang XJ, Zhang PL, Dupree W. A useful panel of immunohistochemical markers in differentiating papillary renal cell carcinoma from papillary urothelial carcinoma. Mod Pathol. 2008; 21(1S):166A.
(49.) Shen SS, Truong LD, Scarpelli M, Lopez-Beltran A. Role of immunohistochemistry in diagnosing renal neoplasms: when is it really useful? Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2012; 136(4):410-417.
(50.) Liu H, Shi J, Wilkerson ML, Lin F. Immunohistochemical evaluation of GATA3 expression in tumors and normal tissues: a useful immunomarker for breast and urothelial carcinomas. Am I Clin Pathol. 2012; 138(1):57-64.
(51.) Yang XJ, Zhou M, Hes O, et al. Tubulocystic carcinoma of the kidney: clinicopathologic and molecular characterization. Am I Surg Pathol. 2008; 32(2): 177-187.
(52.) Zhou M, Yang XJ, Lopez JI, et al. Renal tubulocystic carcinoma is closely related to papillary renal cell carcinoma: implications for pathologic classification. Am I Surg Pathol. 2009; 33(12):1840-1849.
(53.) Williamson SR, Zhang S, Eble JN, et al. Clear cell papillary renal cell carcinoma-like tumors in patients with von Hippel-Lindau disease are unrelated to sporadic clear cell papillary renal cell carcinoma. Am I Surg Pathol. 2013; 37(8):1131-1139.
(54.) Rohan SM, Xiao Y, Liang Y, et al. Clear-cell papillary renal cell carcinoma: molecular and immunohistochemicalanalysis with emphasis on the von Hippel-Lindau gene and hypoxia-inducible factor pathway-related proteins. Mod Pathol. 2011; 24(9):1207-1220.
(55.) Ross H, Martignoni G, Argani P. Renal cell carcinoma with clear cell and papillary features. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2012; 136(4):391-399.
(56.) Cui C, Ziober A, Bing Z. Expression of parafibromin in clear cell papillary renal cell carcinoma. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2013; 21(4):322-325.
(57.) Komai Y, Fujiwara M, Fujii Y, et al. Adult Xp11 translocation renal cell carcinoma diagnosed by cytogenetics and immunohistochemistry. Clin Cancer Res. 2009; 15(4):1170-1176.
(58.) Argani P, Antonescu CR, Illei PB, et al. Primary renal neoplasms with the ASPL-TFE3 gene fusion of alveolar soft part sarcoma: a distinctive tumor entity previously included among renal cell carcinomas of children and adolescents. Am I Pathol. 2001; 159(1):179-192.
(59.) Chang A, Brimo F, Montgomery EA, Epstein JI. Use of PAX8 and GATA3 in diagnosing sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma and sarcomatoid urothelial carcinoma. Hum Pathol. 2013; 44(8):1563-1568.
(60.) Rao P, Tannir NM, Tamboli P. Expression of OCT3/4 in renal medullary carcinoma represents a potential diagnostic pitfall. Am I Surg Pathol. 2012; 36(4): 583-588.
(61.) Liu Q, Galli S, Srinivasan R, Linehan WM, Tsokos M, Merino MJ. Renal medullary carcinoma: molecular, immunohistochemistry, and morphologic correlation. Am I Surg Pathol. 2013; 37(3):368-374.
(62.) Hollmann TJ, Hornick JL. INI1-deficient tumors: diagnostic features and molecular genetics. Am I Surg Pathol. 2011; 35(10):e47-e63.
(63.) Albadine R, Schultz L, Illei P, et al. PAX8 (+)/p63 (-) immunostaining pattern in renal collecting duct carcinoma (CDC): a useful immunoprofile in the differential diagnosis of CDC versus urothelial carcinoma of upper urinary tract. Am I Surg Pathol. 2010; 34(7):965-969.
(64.) Enriquez ML, Lal P, Ziober A, Wang L, Tomaszewski JE, Bing Z. The use of immunohistochemical expression of SF-1 and EMA in distinguishing adrenocortical tumors from renal neoplasms. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2012; 20(2):141-145.
(65.) Sangoi AR, Fujiwara M, West RB, et al. Immunohistochemical distinction of primary adrenal cortical lesions from metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma: a study of 248 cases. Am I Surg Pathol. 2011; 35(5):678-686.
(66.) Williamson SR, Eble JN, Cheng L, Grignon DJ. Clear cell papillary renal cell carcinoma: differential diagnosis and extended immunohistochemical profile. Mod Pathol. 2013; 26(5):697-708.
(67.) Carvalho JC, Thomas DG, McHugh JB, Shah RB, Kunju LP. p63, CK7, PAX8 and INI-1: an optimal immunohistochemical panel to distinguish poorly differentiated urothelial cell carcinoma from high-grade tumours of the renal collecting system. Histopathology. 2012; 60(4):597-608.
(68.) Mallofre C, Castillo M, Morente V, Sole M. Immunohistochemical expression of CK20, p53, and Ki-67 as objective markers of urothelial dysplasia. Mod Pathol. 2003; 16(3):187-191.
(69.) Nakopoulou L, Vourlakou C, Zervas A, Tzonou A, Gakiopoulou H, Dimopoulos MA. The prevalence of bcl-2, p53, and Ki-67 immunoreactivity in transitional cell bladder carcinomas and their clinicopathologic correlates. Hum Pathol. 1998; 29(2):146-154.
(70.) Southgate J, Harnden P, Trejdosiewicz LK. Cytokeratin expression patterns in normal and malignant urothelium: a review of the biological and diagnostic implications. Histol Histopathol. 1999; 14(2):657-664.
(71.) McKenney JK, Desai S, Cohen C, Amin MB. Discriminatory immunohistochemical staining of urothelial carcinoma in situ and non-neoplastic urothelium: an analysis of cytokeratin 20, p53, and CD44 antigens. Am I Surg Pathol. 2001; 25(8):1074-1078.
(72.) McKenney JK, Amin MB. The role of immunohistochemistry in the diagnosis of urinary bladder neoplasms. Semin Diagn Pathol. 2005; 22(1):69-87.
(73.) Cina SJ, Lancaster-Weiss KJ, Lecksell K, Epstein JI. Correlation of Ki-67 and p53 with the new World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology Classification System for Urothelial Neoplasia. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2001; 125(5):646-651.
(74.) Laguna P, Smedts F, Nordling J, et al. Keratin expression profiling of transitional epithelium in the painful bladder syndrome/interstitial cystitis. Am I Clin Pathol. 2006; 125(1):105-110.
(75.) Sarkis AS, Dalbagni G, Cordon-Cardo C, et al. Association of P53 nuclear overexpression and tumor progression in carcinoma in situ of the bladder. I Urol. 1994; 152(2, pt 1):388-392.
(76.) Yin H, Leong AS. Histologic grading of noninvasive papillary urothelial tumors: validation of the 1998 WHO/ISUP system by immunophenotyping and follow-up. Am I Clin Pathol. 2004; 121(5):679-687.
(77.) Harnden P, Eardley I, Joyce AD, Southgate J. Cytokeratin 20 as an objective marker of urothelial dysplasia. Br I Urol. 1996; 78(6):870-875.
(78.) Petraki CD, Sfikas CP. Review: non-papillary urothelial lesions of the urinary bladder: morphological classification and immunohistochemical markers. In Vivo. 2008; 22(4):493-501.
(79.) Soini Y, Turpeenniemi-Hujanen T, Kamel D, et al. p53 immunohistochemistry in transitional cell carcinoma and dysplasia of the urinary bladder correlates with disease progression. Br I Cancer. 1993; 68(5):1029-1035.
(80.) Sun W, Zhang PL, Herrera GA. p53 protein and Ki-67 overexpression in urothelial dysplasia of bladder. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2002; 10(4):327-331.
(81.) Yin H, He Q, Li T, Leong AS. Cytokeratin 20 and Ki-67 to distinguish carcinoma in situ from flat non-neoplastic urothelium. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2006; 14(3):260-265.
(82.) Emerson RE, Cheng L. Immunohistochemical markers in the evaluation of tumors of the urinary bladder: a review. Anal Quant Cytol Histol. 2005; 27(6): 301-316.
(83.) Hodges KB, Lopez-Beltran A, Davidson DD, Montironi R, Cheng L. Urothelial dysplasia and other flat lesions of the urinary bladder: clinicopathologic and molecular features. Hum Pathol. 2010; 41(2):155-162.
(84.) Oliva E, Amin MB, Jimenez R, Young RH. Clear cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder: a report and comparison of four tumors of mullerian origin and nine of probable urothelial origin with discussion of histogenesis and diagnostic problems. Am I Surg Pathol. 2002; 26(2):190-197.
(85.) Torenbeek R, Lagendijk JH, Van Diest PJ, Bril H, van de Molengraft FJ, Meijer CJ. Value of a panel of antibodies to identify the primary origin of adenocarcinomas presenting as bladder carcinoma. Histopathology. 1998; 32(1): 20-27.
(86.) Skinnider BF, Oliva E, Young RH, Amin MB. Expression of alpha-methylacyl-CoA racemase (P504S) in nephrogenic adenoma: a significant immunohistochemical pitfall compounding the differential diagnosis with prostatic adenocarcinoma. Am I Surg Pathol. 2004; 28(6):701-705.
(87.) Xiao GQ, Burstein DE, Miller LK, Unger PD. Nephrogenic adenoma: immunohistochemical evaluation for its etiology and differentiation from prostatic adenocarcinoma. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006; 130(6):805-810.
(88.) Gilcrease MZ, Delgado R, Vuitch F, Albores-Saavedra J. Clear cell adenocarcinoma and nephrogenic adenoma of the urethra and urinary bladder: a histopathologic and immunohistochemical comparison. Hum Pathol. 1998; 29(12):1451-1456.
(89.) McCluggage WG, Ganesan R, Hirschowitz L, Miller K, Rollason TP. Ectopic prostatic tissue in the uterine cervix and vagina: report of a series with a detailed immunohistochemical analysis. Am J Surg Pathol. 2006; 30(2):209-215.
(90.) Halat S, Eble JN, Grignon DJ, et al. Ectopic prostatic tissue: histogenesis and histopathological characteristics. Histopathology. 2011; 58(5):750-758.
(91.) Fromont G, Barcat L, Gaudin J, Irani J. Revisiting the immunophenotype of nephrogenic adenoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2009; 33(11):1654-1658.
(92.) Herawi M, Drew PA, Pan CC, Epstein JI. Clear cell adenocarcinoma of the bladder and urethra: cases diffusely mimicking nephrogenic adenoma. Hum Pathol. 2010; 41(4):594-601.
(93.) Tong GX, Melamed J, Mansukhani M, et al. PAX2: a reliable marker for nephrogenic adenoma. Mod Pathol. 2006; 19(3):356-363.
(94.) Kunju LP, Mehra R, Snyder M, Shah RB. Prostate-specific antigen, highmolecular-weight cytokeratin (clone 34betaE12), and/or p63: an optimal immunohistochemical panel to distinguish poorly differentiated prostate adenocarcinoma from urothelial carcinoma. Am J Clin Pathol. 2006; 125(5):675-681.
(95.) Allan CH, Epstein JI. Nephrogenic adenoma of the prostatic urethra: a mimicker of prostate adenocarcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2001; 25(6):802-808.
(96.) Tong GX, Weeden EM, Hamele-Bena D, et al. Expression of PAX8 in nephrogenic adenoma and clear cell adenocarcinoma of the lower urinary tract: evidence of related histogenesis? Am J Surg Pathol. 2008; 32(9):1380-1387.
(97.) Lopez-Beltran A, Montironi R, Blanca A, Cheng L. Invasive micropapillary urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Hum Pathol. 2010; 41(8):1159-1164.
(98.) Lotan TL, Ye H, Melamed J, Wu XR, Shih I, Epstein JI. Immunohistochemical panel to identify the primary site of invasive micropapillary carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2009; 33(7):1037-1041.
(99.) Johansson SL, Borghede G, Holmang S. Micropapillary bladder carcinoma: a clinicopathological study of 20 cases. J Urol. 1999; 161(6):1798-1802.
(100.) Tacha D, Zhou D, Cheng L. Expression of PAX8 in normal and neoplastic tissues: a comprehensive immunohistochemical study. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2011; 19(4):293-299.
(101.) Kadivar M, Boozari B. Applications and limitations of immunohistochemical expression of "Napsin-A" in distinguishing lung adenocarcinoma from adenocarcinomas of other organs. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2013; 21(3):191-195.
(102.) Turner BM, Cagle PT, Sainz IM, Fukuoka J, Shen SS, Jagirdar J. Napsin A, a new marker for lung adenocarcinoma, is complementary and more sensitive and specific than thyroid transcription factor 1 in the differential diagnosis of primary pulmonary carcinoma: evaluation of 1674 cases by tissue microarray. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2012; 136(2):163-171.
(103.) Bishop JA, Sharma R, Illei PB. Napsin A and thyroid transcription factor-1 expression in carcinomas of the lung, breast, pancreas, colon, kidney, thyroid, and malignant mesothelioma. Hum Pathol. 2010; 41(1):20-25.
(104.) Anttila S. Epithelioid lesions of the serosa. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2012; 136(3):241-252.
(105.) Tot T. The value of cytokeratins 20 and 7 in discriminating metastatic adenocarcinomas from pleural mesotheliomas. Cancer. 2001; 92(10):2727-2732.
(106.) Ordonez NG. Application of immunohistochemistry in the diagnosis of epithelioid mesothelioma: a review and update. Hum Pathol. 2013; 44(1):1-19.
(107.) Chu AY, Litzky LA, Pasha TL, Acs G, Zhang PJ. Utility of D2-40, a novel mesothelial marker, in the diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma. Mod Pathol. 2005; 18(1):105-110.
(108.) Chu PG, Weiss LM. Immunohistochemical characterization of signet-ring cell carcinomas of the stomach, breast, and colon. Am J Clin Pathol. 2004; 121(6): 884-892.
(109.) Raspollini MR, Sardi I, Giunti L, et al. Plasmacytoid urothelial carcinoma of the urinary bladder: clinicopathologic, immunohistochemical, ultrastructural, and molecular analysis of a case series. Hum Pathol. 2011; 42(8):1149-1158.
(110.) Nigwekar P, Tamboli P, Amin MB, Osunkoya AO, Ben-Dor D, Amin MB. Plasmacytoid urothelial carcinoma: detailed analysis of morphology with clinicopathologic correlation in 17 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 2009; 33(3):417-424.
(111.) Lim MG, Adsay NV, Grignon DJ, Osunkoya AO. E-cadherin expression in plasmacytoid, signet ring cell and micropapillary variants of urothelial carcinoma: comparison with usual-type high-grade urothelial carcinoma. Mod Pathol. 2011; 24(2):241-247.
(112.) Fritsche HM, Burger M, Denzinger S, Legal W, Goebell PJ, Hartmann A. Plasmacytoid urothelial carcinoma of the bladder: histological and clinical features of 5 cases. J Urol. 2008; 180(5):1923-1927.
(113.) Lopez-Beltran A, Requena MJ, Montironi R, Blanca A, Cheng L. Plasmacytoid urothelial carcinoma of the bladder. Hum Pathol. 2009; 40(7): 1023-1028.
(114.) Yeh IT, Mies C. Application of immunohistochemistry to breast lesions. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2008; 132(3):349-358.
(115.) Jones TD, Zhang S, Lopez-Beltran A, et al. Urothelial carcinoma with an inverted growth pattern can be distinguished from inverted papilloma by fluorescence in situ hybridization, immunohistochemistry, and morphologic analysis. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007; 31(12):1861-1867.
(116.) Volmar KE, Chan TY, De Marzo AM, Epstein JI. Florid von Brunn nests mimicking urothelial carcinoma: a morphologic and immunohistochemical comparison to the nested variant of urothelial carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2003; 27(9):1243-1252.
(117.) Martignoni G, Eble JN. Carcinoid tumors of the urinary bladder: immunohistochemical study of 2 cases and review of the literature. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2003; 127(1):e22-e24.
(118.) Lin O, Cardillo M, Dalbagni G, Linkov I, Hutchinson B, Reuter VE. Nested variant of urothelial carcinoma: a clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical study of 12 cases. Mod Pathol. 2003; 16(12):1289-1298.
(119.) Cintorino M, Del Vecchio MT, Bugnoli M, Petracca R, Leoncini P. Cytokeratin pattern in normal and pathological bladder urothelium: immunohistochemical investigation using monoclonal antibodies. J Urol. 1988; 139(2):428432.
(120.) Cheng L, Leibovich BC, Cheville JC, et al. Paraganglioma of the urinary bladder: can biologic potential be predicted? Cancer. 2000; 88(4):844-852.
(121.) Kato H, Suzuki M, Mukai M, Aizawa S. Clinicopathological study of pheochromocytoma of the urinary bladder: immunohistochemical, flow cytometric and ultrastructural findings with review of the literature. Pathol Int. 1999; 49(12):1093-1099.
(122.) Kovacs K, Bell D, Gardiner GW, Honey RJ, Goguen J, Rotondo F. Malignant paraganglioma of the urinary bladder: immunohistochemical study of prognostic indicators. Endocr Pathol. 2005; 16(4):363-369.
(123.) Grignon DJ, RoJY, Mackay B, et al. Paraganglioma of the urinary bladder: immunohistochemical, ultrastructural, and DNA flow cytometric studies. Hum Pathol. 1991; 22(11):1162-1169.
(124.) Moyana TN, Kontozoglou T. Urinary bladder paragangliomas: an immunohistochemical study. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1988; 112(1):70-72.
(125.) Wasco MJ, Daignault S, Bradley D, Shah RB. Nested variant of urothelial carcinoma: a clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical study of 30 pure and mixed cases. Hum Pathol. 2010; 41(2):163-171.
(126.) Parker DC, Folpe AL, Bell J, et al. Potential utility of uroplakin III, thrombomodulin, high molecular weight cytokeratin, and cytokeratin 20 in noninvasive, invasive, and metastatic urothelial (transitional cell) carcinomas. Am J Surg Pathol. 2003; 27(1):1-10.
(127.) Wang HL, Lu DW, Yerian LM, et al. Immunohistochemical distinction between primary adenocarcinoma of the bladder and secondary colorectal adenocarcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2001; 25(11):1380-1387.
(128.) Werling RW, Yaziji H, Bacchi CE, Gown AM. CDX2, a highly sensitive and specific marker of adenocarcinomas of intestinal origin: an immunohistochemical survey of 476 primary and metastatic carcinomas. Am J Surg Pathol. 2003; 27(3):303-310.
(129.) Bates AW, Baithun SI. Secondary neoplasms of the bladder are histological mimics of nontransitional cell primary tumours: clinicopathological and histological features of 282 cases. Histopathology. 2000; 36(1):32-40.
(130.) Grignon DJ, Ro JY, Ayala AG, Johnson DE, Ordonez NG. Primary adenocarcinoma of the urinary bladder: a clinicopathologic analysis of 72 cases. Cancer. 1991; 67(8):2165-2172.
(131.) Tamboli P, Mohsin SK, Hailemariam S, Amin MB. Colonic adenocarcinoma metastatic to the urinary tract versus primary tumors of the urinary tract with glandular differentiation: a report of 7 cases and investigation using a limited immunohistochemical panel. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2002; 126(9):1057-1063.
(132.) Sim SJ, RoJY, Ordonez NG, Park YW, Kee KH, Ayala AG. Metastatic renal cell carcinoma to the bladder: a clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical study. Mod Pathol. 1999; 12(4):351-355.
(133.) Chuang AY, DeMarzo AM, Veltri RW, Sharma RB, Bieberich CJ, Epstein JI. Immunohistochemical differentiation of high-grade prostate carcinoma from urothelial carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007; 31(8):1246-1255.
(134.) Kaimaktchiev V, Terracciano L, Tornillo L, et al. The homeobox intestinal differentiation factor CDX2 is selectively expressed in gastrointestinal adenocarcinomas. Mod Pathol. 2004; 17(11):1392-1399.
(135.) Epstein JI, Kuhajda FP, Lieberman PH. Prostate-specific acid phosphatase immunoreactivity in adenocarcinomas of the urinary bladder. Hum Pathol. 1986; 17:939-942.
(136.) Chu PG, Chung L, Weiss LM, Lau SK. Determining the site of origin of mucinous adenocarcinoma: an immunohistochemical study of 175 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 2011; 35(9):1830-1836.
(137.) Rao Q, Williamson SR, Lopez-Beltran A, et al. Distinguishing primary adenocarcinoma of the urinary bladder from secondary involvement by colorectal adenocarcinoma: extended immunohistochemical profiles emphasizing novel markers. Mod Pathol. 2013; 26(5):725-732.
(138.) Chang A, Amin A, Gabrielson E, et al. Utility of GATA3 immunohistochemistry in differentiating urothelial carcinoma from prostate adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinomas of the uterine cervix, anus, and lung. Am J Surg Pathol. 2012; 36(10):1472-1476.
(139.) Ikegami H, Iwasaki H, Ohjimi Y, Takeuchi T, Ariyoshi A, Kikuchi M. Sarcomatoid carcinoma of the urinary bladder: a clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical analysis of 14 patients. Hum Pathol. 2000; 31(3):332-340.
(140.) Westfall DE, Folpe AL, Paner GP, et al. Utility of a comprehensive immunohistochemical panel in the differential diagnosis of spindle cell lesions of the urinary bladder. Am I Surg Pathol. 2009; 33(1):99-105.
(141.) Torenbeek R, Blomjous CE, de Bruin PC, Newling DW, Meijer CJ. Sarcomatoid carcinoma of the urinary bladder: clinicopathologic analysis of 18 cases with immunohistochemical and electron microscopic findings. Am I Surg Pathol. 1994; 18(3):241-249.
(142.) Freeman A, Geddes N, Munson P, et al. Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK 1) staining and molecular analysis in inflammatory myofibroblastic tumours of the bladder: a preliminary clinicopathological study of nine cases and review of the literature. Mod Pathol. 2004; 17(7):765-771.
(143.) Montgomery EA, Shuster DD, Burkart AL, et al. Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumors of the urinary tract: a clinicopathologic study of 46 cases, including a malignant example inflammatory fibrosarcoma and a subset associated with high-grade urothelial carcinoma. Am I Surg Pathol. 2006; 30(12):1502-1512.
(144.) Cessna MH, Zhou H, Sanger WG, et al. Expression of ALK1 and p80 in inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor and its mesenchymal mimics: a study of 135 cases. Mod Pathol. 2002; 15:931-938.
(145.) Alquati S, Gira FA, Bartoli V, Contini S, Corradi D. Low-grade myofibroblastic proliferations of the urinary bladder. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013; 137(8):1117-1128.
(146.) Bauer JL, Miklos AZ, Thompson LD. Parotid gland solitary fibrous tumor: a case report and clinicopathologic review of 22 cases from the literature. Head Neck Pathol. 2012; 6(1):21-31.
(147.) Martin SE, Temm CJ, Goheen MP, Ulbright TM, Hattab EM. Cytoplasmic p63 immunohistochemistry is a useful marker for muscle differentiation: an immunohistochemical and immunoelectron microscopic study. Mod Pathol. 2011; 24(10):1320-1326.
(148.) Heerema-McKenney A, Wijnaendts LC, Pulliam JF, et al. Diffuse myogenin expression by immunohistochemistry is an independent marker of poor survival in pediatric rhabdomyosarcoma: a tissue microarray study of 71 primary tumors including correlation with molecular phenotype. Am I Surg Pathol. 2008; 32(10):1513-1522.
(149.) Folpe AL. MyoD1 and myogenin expression in human neoplasia: a review and update. Adv Anat Pathol. 2002; 9(3):198-203.
(150.) Stock N, Chibon F, Binh MB, et al. Adult-type rhabdomyosarcoma: analysis of 57 cases with clinicopathologic description, identification of 3 morphologic patterns and prognosis. Am I Surg Pathol. 2009; 33(12):1850-1859.
(151.) Epstein JI. Diagnosis of limited adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Histopathology. 2012; 60(1):28-40.
(152.) Signoretti S, Waltregny D, Dilks J, et al. p63 is a prostate basal cell marker and is required for prostate development. Am I Pathol. 2000; 157:1769-1775.
(153.) Parsons JK, Gage WR, Nelson WG, De Marzo AM. p63 protein expression is rare in prostate adenocarcinoma: implications for cancer diagnosis and carcinogenesis. Urology. 2001; 58(4):619-624.
(154.) Hameed O, Humphrey PA. Immunohistochemistry in diagnostic surgical pathology of the prostate. Semin Diagn Pathol. 2005; 22(1):88-104.
(155.) Weinstein MH, Signoretti S, Loda M. Diagnostic utility of immunohistochemical staining for p63, a sensitive marker of prostatic basal cells. Mod Pathol. 2002; 15(12):1302-1308.
(156.) Zhou M, Shah R, Shen R, Rubin MA. Basal cell cocktail (34betaE12 + p63) improves the detection of prostate basal cells. Am I Surg Pathol. 2003; 27(3): 365-371.
(157.) Paner GP, Luthringer DJ, Amin MB. Best practice in diagnostic immunohistochemistry: prostate carcinoma and its mimics in needle core biopsies. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2008; 132(9):1388-1396.
(158.) Osunkoya AO, Hansel DE, Sun X, Netto GJ, Epstein JI. Aberrant diffuse expression of p63 in adenocarcinoma of the prostate on needle biopsy and radical prostatectomy: report of 21 cases. Am I Surg Pathol. 2008; 32(3):461-467.
(159.) Baydar DE, Kulac I, Gurel B, De Marzo A. A case of prostatic adenocarcinoma with aberrant p63 expression: presentation with detailed immunohistochemical study and FISH analysis. Int I Surg Pathol. 2011; 19(1): 131-136.
(160.) Giannico GA, Ross HM, Lotan T, Epstein JI. Aberrant expression of p63 in adenocarcinoma of the prostate: a radical prostatectomy study. Am I Surg Pathol. 2013; 37(9):1401-1406.
(161.) Oliai BR, Kahane H, Epstein JI. Can basal cells be seen in adenocarcinoma of the prostate: an immunohistochemical study using high molecular weight cytokeratin (clone 34betaE12) antibody. Am I Surg Pathol. 2002; 26(9): 1151-1160.
(162.) Varma M, Jasani B. Diagnostic utility of immunohistochemistry in morphologically difficult prostate cancer: review of current literature. Histopathology. 2005; 47(1):1-16.
(163.) Gown AM, Vogel AM. Monoclonal antibodies to human intermediate filament proteins, II: distribution of filament proteins in normal human tissues. Am I Pathol. 1984; 114(2):309-321.
(164.) Brawer MK, Peehl DM, Stamey TA, Bostwick DG. Keratin immunoreactivity in the benign and neoplastic human prostate. Cancer Res. 1985; 45(8): 3663-3667.
(165.) Hedrick L, Epstein JI. Use of keratin 903 as an adjunct in the diagnosis of prostate carcinoma. Am I Surg Pathol. 1989; 13(5):389-396.
(166.) Googe PB, McGinley KM, Fitzgibbon JF. Anticytokeratin antibody 34 beta E12 staining in prostate carcinoma. Am I Clin Pathol. 1997; 107(2):219-223.
(167.) Yang XJ, Lecksell K, Gaudin P, Epstein JI. Rare expression of high-molecular-weight cytokeratin in adenocarcinoma of the prostate gland: a study of 100 cases of metastatic and locally advanced prostate cancer. Am I Surg Pathol. 1999; 23(2):147-152.
(168.) Wojno KJ, Epstein JI. The utility of basal cell-specific anti-cytokeratin antibody (34 beta E12) in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: a review of 228 cases. Am I Surg Pathol. 1995; 19(3):251-260.
(169.) Abrahams NA, Ormsby AH, Brainard J. Validation of cytokeratin 5/6 as an effective substitute for keratin 903 in the differentiation of benign from malignant glands in prostate needle biopsies. Histopathology. 2002; 41:35-41.
(170.) Abrahams NA, Bostwick DG, Ormsby AH, Qian J, Brainard JA. Distinguishing atrophy and high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia from prostatic adenocarcinoma with and without previous adjuvant hormone therapy with the aid of cytokeratin 5/6. Am I Clin Pathol. 2003; 120(3):368-376.
(171.) Xu J, Stolk JA, Zhang X, et al. Identification of differentially expressed genes in human prostate cancer using subtraction and microarray. Cancer Res. 2000; 60(6):1677-1682.
(172.) Jiang Z, Woda BA, Rock KL, et al. P504S: a new molecular marker for the detection of prostate carcinoma. Am I Surg Pathol. 2001; 25(11):1397-1404.
(173.) Liu H, Lin F, Zhai Q. Prostate gland. In: Lin F, Prichard JW, Liu H, Wilkerson ML, Schuerch C, eds. Handbook of Practical Immunohistochemistry: Frequently Asked Questions. New York, NY: Springer; 2011:299-319.
(174.) Luo J, Zha S, Gage WR, et al. Alpha-methylacyl-CoA racemase: a new molecular marker for prostate cancer. Cancer Res. 2002; 62(8):2220-2226.
(175.) Rubin MA, Zhou M, Dhanasekaran SM, et al. alpha-Methylacyl coenzyme A racemase as a tissue biomarker for prostate cancer. IAMA. 2002; 287(13):1662-1670.
(176.) Zhou M, Chinnaiyan AM, Kleer CG, Lucas PC, Rubin MA. Alpha-Methylacyl-CoA racemase: a novel tumor marker over-expressed in several human cancers and their precursor lesions. Am I Surg Pathol. 2002; 26(7):926-931.
(177.) Evans AJ. Alpha-methylacyl CoA racemase (P504S): overview and potential uses in diagnostic pathology as applied to prostate needle biopsies. I Clin Pathol. 2003; 56(12):892-897.
(178.) Zhou M, Aydin H, Kanane H, Epstein JI. How often does alphamethylacyl-CoA-racemase contribute to resolving an atypical diagnosis on prostate needle biopsy beyond that provided by basal cell markers? Am I Surg Pathol. 2004; 28(2):239-243.
(179.) Jiang Z, Woda BA, Wu CL, Yang XJ. Discovery and clinical application of a novel prostate cancer marker: alpha-methylacyl CoA racemase (P504S). Am I Clin Pathol. 2004; 122(2):275-289.
(180.) Zhou M, Jiang Z, Epstein JI. Expression and diagnostic utility of alphamethylacyl-CoA-racemase (P504S) in foamy gland and pseudohyperplastic prostate cancer. Am I Surg Pathol. 2003; 27(6):772-778.
(181.) Beach R, Gown AM, De Peralta-Venturina MN, et al. P504S immunohistochemical detection in 405 prostatic specimens including 376 18-gauge needle biopsies. Am I Surg Pathol. 2002; 26(12):1588-1596.
(182.) Farinola MA, Epstein JI. Utility of immunohistochemistry for alphamethylacyl-CoA racemase in distinguishing atrophic prostate cancer from benign atrophy. Hum Pathol. 2004; 35(10):1272-1278.
(183.) Amin MB, Beach R, Gown AM. Use of a novel immunohistochemical (IHC) panel (P504S, p63 and 34betaE12) in the diagnosis of post-radiation therapy (PRT) prostate cancer (PCa). Mod Pathol. 2003; 16(1S):139A.
(184.) Yang XJ, Laven B, Tretiakova M, et al. Detection of alpha-methylacylcoenzyme A racemase in postradiation prostatic adenocarcinoma. Urology. 2003; 62(2):282-286.
(185.) Wang W, Sun X, Epstein JI. Partial atrophy on prostate needle biopsy cores: a morphologic and immunohistochemical study. Am I Surg Pathol. 2008; 32(6):851-857.
(186.) Herawi M, Parwani AV, Irie J, Epstein JI. Small glandular proliferations on needle biopsies: most common benign mimickers of prostatic adenocarcinoma sent in for expert second opinion. Am I Surg Pathol. 2005; 29(7):874-880.
(187.) Yang XJ, Wu CL, Woda BA, et al. Expression of alpha-methylacyl-CoA racemase (P504S) in atypical adenomatous hyperplasia of the prostate. Am I Surg Pathol. 2002; 26(7):921-925.
(188.) Gupta A, Wang HL, Policarpio-Nicolas ML, et al. Expression of alphamethylacyl-coenzyme A racemase in nephrogenic adenoma. Am I Surg Pathol. 2004; 28(9):1224-1229.
(189.) Cossu-Rocca P, Contini M, Brunelli M, et al. S-100A1 is a reliable marker in distinguishing nephrogenic adenoma from prostatic adenocarcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2009; 33(7):1031-1036.
(190.) Alexiev BA, LeVea CM. Nephrogenic adenoma of the urinary tract: a review. Int J Surg Pathol. 2012; 20(2):123-131.
(191.) Browne TJ, Hirsch MS, Brodsky G, Welch WR, Loda MF, Rubin MA. Prospective evaluation of AMACR (P504S) and basal cell markers in the assessment of routine prostate needle biopsy specimens. Hum Pathol. 2004; 35(12):1462-1468.
(192.) Miettinen M, Wang ZF, Paetau A, et al. ERG transcription factor as an immunohistochemical marker for vascular endothelial tumors and prostatic carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2011; 35(3):432-441.
(193.) Furusato B, Tan SH, Young D, et al. ERG oncoprotein expression in prostate cancer: clonal progression of ERG-positive tumor cells and potential for ERG-based stratification. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2010; 13(3):228-237.
(194.) Liu H, Shi J, Wilkerson M, Yang XJ, Lin F. Immunohistochemical evaluation of ERG expression in various benign and malignant tissues. Ann Clin Lab Sci. 2013; 43(1):3-9.
(195.) Chaux A, Albadine R, Toubaji A, et al. Immunohistochemistry for ERG expression as a surrogate for TMPRSS2-ERG fusion detection in prostatic adenocarcinomas. Am J Surg Pathol. 2011; 35(7):1014-1020.
(196.) Yaskiv O, Zhang X, Simmerman K, et al. The utility of ERG/P63 double immunohistochemical staining in the diagnosis of limited cancer in prostate needle biopsies. Am J Surg Pathol. 2011; 35(7):1062-1068.
(197.) Scheble VJ, Braun M, Beroukhim R, et al. ERG rearrangement is specific to prostate cancer and does not occur in any other common tumor. Mod Pathol. 2010; 23(8):1061-1067.
(198.) Bodey B, Bodey B Jr, Kaiser HE. Immunocytochemical detection of prostate specific antigen expression in human primary and metastatic melanomas. Anticancer Res. 1997; 17(3C):2343-2346.
(199.) Bodey B, Bodey B Jr, Kaiser HE. Immunocytochemical detection of prostate specific antigen expression in human breast carcinoma cells. Anticancer Res. 1997; 17(4A):2577-2581.
(200.) Hall RE, Clements JA, Birrell SN, Tilley WD. Prostate-specific antigen and gross cystic disease fluid protein-15 are co-expressed in androgen receptor-positive breast tumours. Br J Cancer. 1998; 78(3):360-365.
(201.) James GK, Pudek M, Berean KW, Diamandis EP, Archibald BL. Salivary duct carcinoma secreting prostate-specific antigen. Am J Clin Pathol. 1996; 106(2):242-247.
(202.) Fan CY, Wang J, Barnes EL. Expression of androgen receptor and prostatic specific markers in salivary duct carcinoma: an immunohistochemical analysis of 13 cases and review of the literature. Am J Surg Pathol. 2000; 24(4):579-586.
(203.) Varma M, Morgan M, Jasani B, Tamboli P, Amin MB. Polyclonal anti-PSA is more sensitive but less specific than monoclonal anti-PSA: implications for diagnostic prostatic pathology. Am J Clin Pathol. 2002; 118(2):202-207.
(204.) Goldstein NS. Immunophenotypic characterization of 225 prostate adenocarcinomas with intermediate or high Gleason scores. Am J Clin Pathol. 2002; 117(3):471-477.
(205.) Xu J, Kalos M, Stolk JA, et al. Identification and characterization of prostein, a novel prostate-specific protein. Cancer Res. 2001; 61(4):1563-1568.
(206.) Kalos M, Askaa J, Hylander BL, et al. Prostein expression is highly restricted to normal and malignant prostate tissues. Prostate. 2004; 60(3):246-256.
(207.) Sheridan T, Herawi M, Epstein JI, Illei PB. The role of P501S and PSA in the diagnosis of metastatic adenocarcinoma of the prostate. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007; 31(9):1351-1355.
(208.) Yin M, Dhir R, Parwani AV. Diagnostic utility of p501s (prostein) in comparison to prostate specific antigen (PSA) for the detection of metastatic prostatic adenocarcinoma. Diagn Pathol. 2007; 2(1):41.
(209.) Gurel B, Ali TZ, Montgomery EA, et al. NKX3.1 as a marker of prostatic origin in metastatic tumors. Am I Surg Pathol. 2010; 34(8):1097-1105.
(210.) Gelmann EP, Bowen C, Bubendorf L. Expression of NKX3.1 in normal and malignant tissues. Prostate. 2003; 55(2):111-117.
(211.) Ornstein DK, Cinquanta M, Weiler S, et al. Expression studies and mutational analysis of the androgen regulated homeobox gene NKX3.1 in benign and malignant prostate epithelium. J Urol. 2001; 165(4):1329-1334.
(212.) Ye H, Ulbright TM. Difficult differential diagnoses in testicular pathology. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2012; 136(4):435-446.
(213.) Wilkerson M, Lin F, Shi J. NANOG immunohistochemical expression in tumors. Mod Pathol. 2012; 25(S2):251A.
(214.) Bahrami A, Ro JY, Ayala AG. An overview of testicular germ cell tumors. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2007; 131(8):1267-1280.
(215.) Cao D, Li J, Guo CC, Allan RW, Humphrey PA. SALL4 is a novel diagnostic marker for testicular germ cell tumors. Am J Surg Pathol. 2009; 33(7): 1065-1077.
(216.) Dekker I, Rozeboom T, Delemarre J, Dam A, Oosterhuis JW. Placentallike alkaline phosphatase and DNA flow cytometry in spermatocytic seminoma. Cancer. 1992; 69(4):993-996.
(217.) Emerson RE, Ulbright TM. Morphological approach to tumours of the testis and paratestis. J Clin Pathol. 2007; 60(8):866-880.
(218.) Gopalan A, Dhall D, Olgac S, et al. Testicular mixed germ cell tumors: a morphological and immunohistochemical study using stem cell markers, OCT3/ 4, SOX2 and GDF3, with emphasis on morphologically difficult-to-classify areas. Mod Pathol. 2009; 22(8):1066-1074.
(219.) Jones TD, Ulbright TM, Eble JN, Cheng L. OCT4: a sensitive and specific biomarker for intratubular germ cell neoplasia of the testis. Clin Cancer Res. 2004; 10(24):8544-8547.
(220.) Mostofi FK, Sesterhenn IA, Davis CJ Jr. Immunopathology of germ cell tumors of the testis. Semin Diagn Pathol. 1987; 4(4):320-341.
(221.) Tickoo SK, Hutchinson B, Bacik J, et al. Testicular seminoma: a clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical study of 105 cases with special reference to seminomas with atypical features. Int J Surg Pathol. 2002; 10(1):23-32.
(222.) de Jong J, Stoop H, Dohle GR, et al. Diagnostic value of OCT3/4 for preinvasive and invasive testicular germ cell tumours. J Pathol.
(223.) Caillaud JM, Bellet D, Carlu C, Droz JP. Immunohistochemistry of germ cell tumors of the testis: study of beta HCG and AFP. Prog Clin Biol Res. 1985; 203:139-140.
(224.) Burke AP, Mostofi FK. Placental alkaline phosphatase immunohistochemistry of intratubular malignant germ cells and associated testicular germ cell tumors. Hum Pathol. 1988; 19(6):663-670.
(225.) Burke AP, Mostofi FK. Intratubular malignant germ cells in testicular biopsies: clinical course and identification by staining for placental alkaline phosphatase. Mod Pathol. 1988; 1(6):475-479.
(226.) Bailey D, Marks A, Stratis M, Baumal R. Immunohistochemical staining of germ cell tumors and intratubular malignant germ cells of the testis using antibody to placental alkaline phosphatase and a monoclonal anti-seminoma antibody. Mod Pathol. 1991; 4(2):167-171.
(227.) Bosman FT, Giard RW, Nieuwenhuijen Kruseman AC, Knijnenburg G, Spaander PJ. Human chorionic gonadotrophin and alpha-fetoprotein in testicular germ cell tumours: a retrospective immunohistochemical study. Histopathology. 1980; 4(6):673-684.
(228.) Bomeisl PE, MacLennan GT. Spermatocytic seminoma. J Urol. 2007; 177(2):734.
(229.) Battifora H, Sheibani K, Tubbs RR, Kopinski MI, Sun TT. Antikeratin antibodies in tumor diagnosis: distinction between seminoma and embryonal carcinoma. Cancer. 1984; 54(5):843-848.
(230.) Bartkova J, Rejthar A, Bartek J, Kovarik J. Differentiation patterns of testicular germ-cell tumours as revealed by a panel of monoclonal antibodies. Tumour Biol. 1987; 8(1):45-56.
(231.) Wittekind C, Wichmann T, Von Kleist S. Immunohistological localization of AFP and HCG in uniformly classified testis tumors. Anticancer Res. 1983; 3(5): 327-330.
(232.) Wick MR, Swanson PE, Manivel JC. Placental-like alkaline phosphatase reactivity in human tumors: an immunohistochemical study of 520 cases. Hum Pathol. 1987; 18(9):946-954.
(233.) Rajpert-De Meyts E, Kvist M, Skakkebaek NE. Heterogeneity of expression of immunohistochemical tumour markers in testicular carcinoma in situ: pathogenetic relevance. Virchows Arch. 1996; 428(3):133-139.
(234.) Pallesen G, Hamilton-Dutoit SJ. Ki-1 (CD30) antigen is regularly expressed by tumor cells of embryonal carcinoma. Am J Pathol. 1988; 133(3): 446-450.
(235.) Niehans GA, Manivel JC, Copland GT, Scheithauer BW, Wick MR. Immunohistochemistry of germ cell and trophoblastic neoplasms. Cancer. 1988; 62(6):1113-1123.
(236.) Manivel JC, Jessurun J, Wick MR, Dehner LP. Placental alkaline phosphatase immunoreactivity in testicular germ-cell neoplasms. Am J Surg Pathol. 1987; 11(1):21-29.
(237.) Manivel JC, Simonton S, Wold LE, Dehner LP. Absence of intratubular germ cell neoplasia in testicular yolk sac tumors in children: a histochemical and immunohistochemical study. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1988; 112(6):641-645.
(238.) Eglen DE, Ulbright TM. The differential diagnosis of yolk sac tumor and seminoma: usefulness of cytokeratin, alpha-fetoprotein, and alpha-1-antitrypsin immunoperoxidase reactions. Am J Clin Pathol. 1987; 88(3):328-332.
(239.) Leroy X, Augusto D, Leteurtre E, Gosselin B. CD30 and CD117 (c-kit) used in combination are useful for distinguishing embryonal carcinoma from seminoma. J Histochem Cytochem. 2002; 50(2):283-285.
(240.) Kraggerud SM, Berner A, Bryne M, Pettersen EO, Fossa SD. Spermatocytic seminoma as compared to classical seminoma: an immunohistochemical and DNA flow cytometric study. APMIS. 1999; 107(3):297-302.
(241.) Koshida K, Wahren B. Placental-like alkaline phosphatase in seminoma. Urol Res. 1990; 18(2):87-92.
(242.) Cummings OW, Ulbright TM, Eble JN, Roth LM. Spermatocytic seminoma: an immunohistochemical study. Hum Pathol. 1994; 25(1):54-59.
(243.) Jacobsen GK, Norgaard-Pedersen B. Placental alkaline phosphatase in testicular germ cell tumours and in carcinoma-in-situ of the testis: an immunohistochemical study. Acta Pathol Microbiol Immunol Scand A. 1984; 92(5):323-329.
(244.) Hustin J, Collette J, Franchimont P. Immunohistochemical demonstration of placental alkaline phosphatase in various states of testicular development and in germ cell tumours. Int I Androl. 1987; 10(1):29-35.
(245.) Hittmair A, Rogatsch H, Hobisch A, Mikuz G, Feichtinger H. CD30 expression in seminoma. Hum Pathol. 1996; 27(11):1166-1171.
(246.) Kalhor N, Ramirez PT, Deavers MT, Malpica A, Silva EG. Immunohistochemical studies of trophoblastic tumors. Am I Surg Pathol. 2009; 33(4):633638.
(247.) Ota S, Hishinuma M, Yamauchi N, et al. Oncofetal protein glypican-3 in testicular germ-cell tumor. Virchows Arch. 2006; 449(3):308-314.
(248.) Visfeldt J, Jorgensen N, Muller J, Moller H, Skakkebaek NE. Testicular germ cell tumours of childhood in Denmark, 1943-1989: incidence and evaluation of histology using immunohistochemical techniques. I Pathol. 1994; 174(1):39-47.
(249.) Kersemaekers AM, Honecker F, Stoop H, et al. Identification of germ cells at risk for neoplastic transformation in gonadoblastoma: an immunohistochemical study for OCT3/4 and TSPY. Hum Pathol. 2005; 36(5):512-521.
(250.) Zynger DL, McCallum JC, Luan C, Chou PM, Yang XJ. Glypican 3 has a higher sensitivity than alpha-fetoprotein for testicular and ovarian yolk sac tumour: immunohistochemical investigation with analysis of histological growth patterns. Histopathology. 2010; 56(6):750-757.
(251.) Looijenga LH, Stoop H, de Leeuw HP, et al. POU5F1 (OCT3/4) identifies cells with pluripotent potential in human germ cell tumors. Cancer Res. 2003; 63(9):2244-2250.
(252.) Hoei-Hansen CE, Almstrup K, Nielsen JE, et al. Stem cell pluripotency factor NANOG is expressed in human fetal gonocytes, testicular carcinoma in situ and germ cell tumours. Histopathology. 2005; 47(1):48-56.
(253.) Hart AH, Hartley L, Parker K, et al. The pluripotency homeobox gene NANOG is expressed in human germ cell tumors. Cancer. 2005; 104(10):2092-2098.
(254.) Zynger DL, Dimov ND, Luan C, Teh BT, Yang XJ. Glypican 3: a novel marker in testicular germ cell tumors. Am I Surg Pathol. 2006; 30(12):1570-1575.
(255.) Ezeh UI, Turek PJ, Reijo RA, Clark AT. Human embryonic stem cell genes OCT4, NANOG, STELLAR, and GDF3 are expressed in both seminoma and breast carcinoma. Cancer. 2005; 104(10):2255-2265.
(256.) Emerson RE, Ulbright TM. The use of immunohistochemistry in the differential diagnosis of tumors of the testis and paratestis. Semin Diagn Pathol. 2005; 22(1):33-50.
(257.) Wilkerson M, Lin F, Shi J. SF-1 immunohistochemical expressio in tumors. Mod Pathol. 2013; 26(S2):230A.
(258.) Devouassoux-Shisheboran M, Deschildre C, Mauduit C, et al. Expression of galectin-3 in gonads and gonadal sex cord stromal and germ cell tumors. Oncol Rep. 2006; 16(2):335-340.
(259.) Iczkowski KA, Bostwick DG, Roche PC, Cheville JC. Inhibin A is a sensitive and specific marker for testicular sex cord-stromal tumors. Mod Pathol. 1998; 11(8):774-779.
(260.) Groisman GM, Dische MR, Fine EM, Unger PD. Juvenile granulosa cell tumor of the testis: a comparative immunohistochemical study with normal infantile gonads. Pediatr Pathol. 1993; 13(4):389-400.
(261.) McCluggage WG, Shanks JH, Whiteside C, Maxwell P, Banerjee SS, Biggart JD. Immunohistochemical study of testicular sex cord-stromal tumors, including staining with anti-inhibin antibody. Am I Surg Pathol. 1998; 22(5):615-619.
(262.) Nielsen K, Jacobsen GK. Malignant Sertoli cell tumour of the testis: an immunohistochemical study and a review of the literature. APMIS. 1988; 96(8): 755-760.
(263.) Sasano H, Nakashima N, Matsuzaki O, et al. Testicular sex cord-stromal lesions: immunohistochemical analysis of cytokeratin, vimentin and steroidogenic enzymes. Virchows Arch A Pathol Anat Histopathol. 1992; 421(2):163-169.
(264.) Sato K, Ueda Y, Sakurai A, et al. Large cell calcifying Sertoli cell tumor of the testis: comparative immunohistochemical study with Leydig cell tumor. Pathol Int. 2005; 55(6):366-371.
(265.) Kommoss F, Oliva E, Bittinger F, et al. Inhibin-alpha CD99, HEA125, PLAP, and chromogranin immunoreactivity in testicular neoplasms and the androgen insensitivity syndrome. Hum Pathol. 2000; 31(9):1055-1061.
(266.) Cao QJ, Jones JG, Li M. Expression of calretinin in human ovary, testis, and ovarian sex cord-stromal tumors. Int I Gynecol Pathol. 2001; 20(4):346-352.
(267.) Al-Agha OM, Axiotis CA. An in-depth look at Leydig cell tumor of the testis. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2007; 131(2):311-317.
(268.) Jimenez-Quintero LP, Ro JY, Zavala-Pompa A, et al. Granulosa cell tumor of the adult testis: a clinicopathologic study of seven cases and a review of the literature. Hum Pathol. 1993; 24(10):1120-1125.
(269.) Al-Bozom IA, El-Faqih SR, Hassan SH, El-Tiraifi AE, Talic RF. Granulosa cell tumor of the adult type: a case report and review of the literature of a very rare testicular tumor. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2000; 124(10):1525-1528.
(270.) Ventura T, Discepoli S, Coletti G, et al. Light microscopic, immunocytochemical and ultrastructural study of a case of Sertoli cell tumor of the testis. Tumori. 1987; 73(6):649-653.
(271.) Perez-Atayde AR, Joste N, Mulhern H. Juvenile granulosa cell tumor of the infantile testis: evidence of a dual epithelial-smooth muscle differentiation. Am I Surg Pathol. 1996; 20(1):72-79.
(272.) Nistal M, Lazaro R, Garcia J, Paniagua R. Testicular granulosa cell tumor of the adult type. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1992; 116(3):284-287.
(273.) Morgan DR, Brame KG. Granulosa cell tumour of the testis displaying immunoreactivity for inhibin. BIU Int. 1999; 83(6):731-732.
(274.) Matias-Guiu X, Pons C, Prat J. Mullerian inhibiting substance, alphainhibin, and CD99 expression in sex cord-stromal tumors and endometrioid ovarian carcinomas resembling sex cord-stromal tumors. Hum Pathol. 1998; 29(8):840-845.
(275.) Kratzer SS, Ulbright TM, Talerman A, et al. Large cell calcifying Sertoli cell tumor of the testis: contrasting features of six malignant and six benign tumors and a review of the literature. Am I Surg Pathol. 1997; 21(11):1271-1280.
(276.) Henley JD, Young RH, Ulbright TM. Malignant Sertoli cell tumors of the testis: a study of 13 examples of a neoplasm frequently misinterpreted as seminoma. Am I Surg Pathol. 2002; 26(5):541-550.
(277.) Harms D, Kock LR. Testicular juvenile granulosa cell and Sertoli cell tumours: a clinicopathological study of 29 cases from the Kiel Paediatric Tumour Registry. Virchows Arch. 1997; 430(4):301-309.
(278.) Plata C, Algaba F, Andujar M, et al. Large cell calcifying Sertoli cell tumour of the testis. Histopathology. 1995; 26(3):255-259.
(279.) Hammerich KH, Hille S, Ayala GE, et al. Malignant advanced granulosa cell tumor of the adult testis: case report and review of the literature. Hum Pathol. 2008; 39(5):701-709.
(280.) Petersson F, Bulimbasic S, Sima R, et al. Large cell calcifying Sertoli cell tumor: a clinicopathologic study of 1 malignant and 3 benign tumors using histomorphology, immunohistochemistry, ultrastructure, comparative genomic hybridization, and polymerase chain reaction analysis of the PRKAR1A gene. Hum Pathol. 2010; 41(4):552-559.
(281.) Amin MB. Selected other problematic testicular and paratesticular lesions: rete testis neoplasms and pseudotumors, mesothelial lesions and secondary tumors. Mod Pathol. 2005; 18(suppl 2):S131-S145.
(282.) Delahunt B, Eble JN, King D, Bethwaite PB, Nacey JN, Thornton A. Immunohistochemical evidence for mesothelial origin of paratesticular adenomatoid tumour. Histopathology. 2000; 36(2):109-115.
(283.) Ballotta MR, Borghi L, Barucchello G. Adenocarcinoma of the rete testis: report of two cases. Adv Clin Pathol. 2000; 4(4):169-173.
(284.) Detassis C, Pusiol T, Piscioli F, Luciani L. Adenomatoid tumor of the epididymis: immunohistochemical study of 8 cases. Urol Int. 1986; 41(3):232-234.
(285.) Crisp-Lindgren N, Travers H, Wells MM, Cawley LP. Papillary adenocarcinoma of rete testis: autopsy findings, histochemistry, immunohistochemistry, ultrastructure, and clinical correlations. Am I Surg Pathol. 1988; 12(6):492-501.
(286.) Jones MA, Young RH, Srigley JR, Scully RE. Paratesticular serous papillary carcinoma: a report of six cases. Am I Surg Pathol. 1995; 19(12):1359-1365.
(287.) Kamiya M, Eimoto T. Malignant mesothelioma of the tunica vaginalis. Pathol Res Pract. 1990; 186(5):680-684.
(288.) Menon PK, Vasudevarao, Sabhiki A, Kudesia S, Joshi DP, Mathur UB. A case of carcinoma rete testis: histomorphological, immunohistochemical and ultrastructural findings and review of literature. Indian I Cancer. 2002; 39(3):106-111.
(289.) Perez-Ordonez B, Srigley JR. Mesothelial lesions of the paratesticular region. Semin Diagn Pathol. 2000; 17(4):294-306.
(290.) Winstanley AM, Landon G, Berney D, Minhas S, Fisher C, Parkinson MC. The immunohistochemical profile of malignant mesotheliomas of the tunica vaginalis: a study of 20 cases. Am I Surg Pathol. 2006; 30(1):1-6.
(291.) Wachter DL, Wunsch PH, Hartmann A, Agaimy A. Adenomatoid tumors of the female and male genital tract: a comparative clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical analysis of 47 cases emphasizing their site-specific morphologic diversity. Virchows Arch. 2011; 458(5):593-602.
(292.) Al-Salam S, Hammad FT, Salman MA, AlAshari M. Expression of Wilms tumor-1 protein and CD 138 in malignant mesothelioma of the tunica vaginalis. Pathol Res Pract. 2009; 205(11):797-800.
(293.) Jones MA, Young RH, Scully RE. Malignant mesothelioma of the tunica vaginalis: a clinicopathologic analysis of 11 cases with review of the literature. Am I Surg Pathol. 1995; 19(7):815-825.
(294.) Kurihara K, Oka A, Mannami M, Iwata Y. Papillary adenocarcinoma of the epididymis. Acta Pathol Ipn. 1993; 43(7-8):440-443.
(295.) Kim JY, Lee YT, Kang HJ, Lee CH. Primary mucinous cystadenoma of the spermatic cord within the inguinal canal. Diagn Pathol. 2012; 7:139.
(296.) Sanchez-Chapado M, Angulo JC, Haas GP. Adenocarcinoma of the rete testis. Urology. 1995; 46(4):468-475.
(297.) Ganem JP, Jhaveri FM, Marroum MC. Primary adenocarcinoma of the epididymis: case report and review of the literature. Urology. 1998; 52(5):904-908.
(298.) Anchala PR, Dhir R, Parwani AV, Zynger DL. Immunohistochemical profile of paratesticular serous papillary adenocarcinoma and tunica vaginalis facilitates distinction from malignant mesothelioma. Int J Surg Pathol. 2011; 19(5): 692-698.
(299.) McCluggage WG, Shah V, Nott C, Clements B, Wilson B, Hill CM. Cystadenoma of spermatic cord resembling ovarian serous epithelial tumour of low malignant potential: immunohistochemical study suggesting Mullerian differentiation. Histopathology. 1996; 28(1):77-80.
(300.) Bremmer F, Schweyer S, Behnes CL, Blech M, Radzun HJ. Sertoliform cystadenoma: a rare benign tumour of the rete testis. Diagn Pathol. 2013; 8:23.
(301.) Kacar A, Senel E, Caliskan D, Demirel F, Tiryaki T. Sertoliform cystadenoma: a case with overlapping features. Pediatr Dev Pathol. 2011; 14(2): 138-143.
(302.) Nistal M, Revestido R, Paniagua R. Bilateral mucinous cystadenocarcinoma of the testis and epididymis. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1992; 116(12):13601363.
(303.) Thiel R, Effert P. Primary adenocarcinoma of the seminal vesicles. J Urol. 2002; 168(5):1891-1896.
(304.) Ormsby AH, Haskell R, Jones D, Goldblum JR. Primary seminal vesicle carcinoma: an immunohistochemical analysis of four cases. Mod Pathol. 2000; 13(1):46-51.
(305.) Ohmori T, Okada K, Tabei R, et al. CA125-producing adenocarcinoma of the seminal vesicle. Pathol Int. 1994; 44(4):333-337.
(306.) Tong GX, Memeo L, Colarossi C, et al. PAX8 and PAX2 immunostaining facilitates the diagnosis of primary epithelial neoplasms of the male genital tract. Am J Surg Pathol. 2011; 35(10):1473-1483.
(307.) Zhao C, Barner R, Vinh TN, McManus K, Dabbs D, Vang R. SF-1 is a diagnostically useful immunohistochemical marker and comparable to other sex cord-stromal tumor markers for the differential diagnosis of ovarian sertoli cell tumor. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2008; 27(4):507-514.
(308.) Michal M, Kazakov DV, Kacerovska D, et al. Paratesticular cystadenomas with ovarian stroma, metaplastic serous Mullerian epithelium, and male adnexal tumor of probable wolffian origin: a series of 5 hitherto poorly recognized testicular tumors. Ann Diagn Pathol. 2013; 17(2):151-158.
Myra L. Wilkerson, MD; Fan Lin, MD, PhD; Haiyan Liu, MD; Liang Cheng, MD
Accepted for publication April 10, 2014.
From the Department of Laboratory Medicine, Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, Pennsylvania (Drs Wilkerson, Lin, and Liu); and the Department of Laboratory Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis (Dr Cheng).
The authors have no relevant financial interest in the products or companies described in this article.
Reprints: Myra L. Wilkerson, MD, Department of Laboratory Medicine, MC 01-31, Geisinger Medical Center, 100 N Academy Ave, Danville, PA 17822 (e-mail: email@example.com).
* References 50, 72, 82, 85, 100, 126-138.
([dagger]) References 271, 274, 280, 288, 292, 293, 295, 298, 303-308.
Caption: Figure 1. Summary of the specific immunoprofile for each renal neoplasm. Abbreviations: AML, angiomyolipoma; Ber-EP4, epithelial cell adhesion molecule; CAIX, carbonic anhydrase IX; CD, cluster of differentiation; CDC, collecting duct carcinoma; ChRCC, chromophobe renal cell carcinoma; CK, cytokeratin; CPRCC, clear cell papillary renal cell carcinoma; CRCC, clear cell renal cell carcinoma; EMA, epithelial membrane antigen; GATA3, GATA-binding protein 3; HMB-45, human melanoma black 45; INI-1, integrase interactor 1; KIM-1, kidney injury molecule-1; ksp-cad, kidneyspecific cadherin; MA, metanephric adenoma; Mart-1, melanoma-associated antigen recognized by Tcells 1; MTSCC, mucinous tubular and spindle cell carcinoma; ND, no data; OCT4, octamer-binding transcription factor 4; PAX, paired box gene; pCEA, polyclonal carcinoembryonic antigen; PRCC, papillary renal cell carcinoma; pVHL, von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor; P504S, a-methylacyl-CoA racemase; RCC, renal cell carcinoma; RCCma, renal cell carcinoma marker; RMC, renal medullary carcinoma; SMA, smooth muscle actin; S100P, placental S100; TFE3, transcription factor E3; UUC, upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma; WT1, Wilms tumor 1; Xp11 TRCC, Xp11 translocation renal cell carcinoma.
Caption: Figure 2. An example of type I papillary renal cell carcinoma with clear cell features on a small needle core biopsy. A, Hematoxylin-eosin-stained section. B, Diffuse and strong positivity for CK7. C, Diffuse and strong positivity for P504S. D, Focal positivity for CAIX (original magnification X10 [A through D]).
Caption: Figure 3. Primary precursor B-cell lymphoma of the kidney in a 4-year-old boy. A, Hematoxylin-eosin-stained section. B, Membranous staining for CD99. C, Nuclear staining for Fli-1. D, Nuclear staining for PAX5. E, Nuclear staining for TdT. F, Membranous staining for CD10 (original magnification X10 [A through F]).
Caption: Figure 4. A, CD44 stain in normal urothelium shows faint staining in the basal cell layer. B, CD44 stain in polypoid cystitis stains all cell layers of the urothelium. C, Ki-67 stains a few basal and deep intermediate cells in normal urothelium. D, Ki-67 expression may be increased in polypoid cystitis but will still be confined predominantly to basal cells. E, p53 may show weak staining of a few cells in normal urothelium. F, p53 may stain more cells and with slightly more intensity in reactive processes such as polypoid cystitis (original magnifications X10 [A, C, and E], X5 [B, D, and F]).
Caption: Figure 5. A, Nephrogenic adenoma. B, Nuclear staining for PAX-2, nephrogenic adenoma. C, Diffuse CK7 staining, nephrogenic adenoma. D, Lack of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) expression, nephrogenic adenoma. E, Prostate adenocarcinoma. F, Lack of expression for PAX-2, prostate adenocarcinoma. G, Negative for CK7, prostate adenocarcinoma. H, Strong and diffuse staining for PSA, prostate adenocarcinoma (hematoxylineosin, original magnification X5 [A and E]; original magnification X5 [B through D and F through H]).
Caption: Figure 6. A, Prostate adenocarcinoma. B, NKX2.1 expression, nuclear pattern, prostate adenocarcinoma (hematoxylin-eosin, original magnification X10 [A]; original magnification X10 [B]).
Caption: Figure 7. A, PLAP stains membranes of intratubular germ cell neoplasia (ITGCN). B, OCT-4 stains nuclei of ITGCN. C, Inhibin-[alpha] stains the Sertoli cells within the seminiferous tubule, as well as the Leydig cells in the interstitium, but not the neoplastic germ cells (ITGCN). D, CAM 5.2 stains the epithelium of the rete testis, but not the ITGCN that is showing a pagetoid pattern. E, PAX8 will also stain the nuclei of the rete testis epithelium, but not ITGCN. F, Glypican-3 highlights the syncytiotrophoblast in this yolk sac tumor (original magnification X5 [A through F]).
Caption: Figure 8. Nuclei of Sertoli cells (red arrow) within seminiferous tubules stain for SF-1, as do Leydig cells (green arrow) in the interstitium. Note that spermatocytic precursors (black arrow) within the seminiferous tubules do not stain (original magnification X10).
Table 1. Data Interpretation Symbol Interpretation - Usually <5% of cases stain with that antibody + Usually >70% of cases stain with that antibody +/- 50%-70% of cases stain with that antibody -/+ 5%-50% of cases stain with that antibody ND No published data are available Table 2. Antibody Abbreviations in the Data Tables Abbreviation Antibody Name 34BE12 High-molecular-weight cytokeratin (CK903) AFP [alpha]-Fetoprotein ALK-1 Anaplastic lymphoma kinase 1 Ber-EP4 Epithelial cell adhesion molecule CA 125 Cancer antigen 125 Cad Cadherin CAIX Carbonic anhydrase IX Calret Calretinin CD Cluster of differentiation CDX2 Caudal type homeobox 2 CEA Carcinoembryonic antigen Chrom Chromogranin CK Cytokeratin EMA Epithelial membrane antigen ER Estrogen receptor GAL-3 Galectin 3 GATA GATA-binding protein GLUT1 Glucose transporter 1 GPC3 Glypican-3 hCG Human chorionic gonadotropin INHA Inhibin [alpha] INI-1 Integrase interactor 1 KIM Kidney injury molecule ksp-cad Kidney-specific cadherin LCA Leukocyte common antigen (CD45) Mamma Mammaglobin Mart-1 Melanoma-associated antigen recognized by T cells 1 MUC Mucin MyoDl Myogenic determination 1 OCT4 Octamer-binding transcription factor 4 P504S [alpha]-Methylacyl-CoA racemase Paraf Parafibromin Parv Parvalbumin PAX Paired box gene PLAP Placental-like alkaline phosphatase PR Progesterone receptor PSA Prostate-specific antigen pVHL von Hippel-Lindau tumor suppressor gene products RCCma Renal cell carcinoma marker S100P Placental S100 SALL4 Sal-like 4 SF-1 Steroidogenic factor 1 SMA Smooth muscle actin Synap Synaptophysin TFE3 Transcription factor E3 TTF-1 Thyroid transcription factor 1 Vim Vimentin WT1 Wilms tumor 1 Table 3. Expression of Immunomarkers in Proximal Tubules, Distal Normal Tubules, and Glomeruli (a,b) Antibodies Proximal Tubules Distal Tubules Glomeruli CK7 - + - CK20 - - - EMA - + - Vim - - + E-cad - + - CD10 + - + CK903 - + - CK19 + + - P504S + +, weak - S100A1 + +, focal - Villin + - - KIM-1 - - - CAIX - - - pVHL + + - RCCma + - - ksp-cad + + - PAX2 - + - PAX8 -/+ + - CD117 - - - WT1 - - - CD57 - - - MUC1 - + - Parv - + - (a) Please refer to Tables 1 and 2 for definitions of symbols and antibody abbreviations. (b) S100A1 and parvalbumin show both nuclear and cytoplasmic staining patterns. S100A1 in distal tubular staining is very focal (1 + out of 4+). PAX8 staining is similar to that of PAX2, but it usually shows stronger nuclear staining and more reproducible results. The staining signal of PAX8 is much stronger in distal tubules than in proximal tubules. Table 4. Useful Immunomarkers in the Diagnosis of Renal Epithelial Neoplasms (a) Antibodies CRCC PRCC ChRCC CPRCC Onco EMA + + + + + CK7 - + + + - CK20 - - - - - CK903 - - - +/- - p63 - - - - - CD10 + + -/+ +/- -/+ CAIX + +/-, focal - + - P504S -/+ + - - - KIM-1 + + - ND - PAX2/PAX8 + + +/- + + RCCma + + -/+ +/- - CD117 - - + - + S100A1 + +/- - ND + S100P - - - - - GATA3 - - - - - CD15 - - - - +/- Vim + +/- - +/- - ksp-cad -/+ - + ND + Antibodies CDC MTSCC UUC EMA + + + CK7 + + + CK20 - - +/- CK903 + - + p63 - - + CD10 - - - CAIX -/+ ND + P504S -/+ +/- -/+ KIM-1 - ND - PAX2/PAX8 + - - RCCma - - - CD117 + - - S100A1 - - - S100P - - + GATA3 - - + CD15 - - +/- Vim + - - ksp-cad - - - Abbreviations: CDC, collecting duct carcinoma; ChRCC, chromophobe renal cell carcinoma; CPRCC, clear cell papillary renal cell carcinoma; CRCC, clear cell renal cell carcinoma; MTSCC, mucinous tubular and spindle cell carcinoma; Onco, oncocytoma; PRCC, papillary renal cell carcinoma (type I); UUC, upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma. (a) Please refer to Tables 1 and 2 for definitions of symbols and antibody abbreviations. Table 5. Differential Diagnosis of Low-Grade Renal Cell Tumor With Clear Cell/Granular Cell Features3 Antibodies ChRCC Oncocytoma CRCC CK7 Diffusely + -/focally + - Ber-EP4 Diffusely + -/focally + ND S100A1 - + +/- CD15 - +/- - CD82 + - -/+ Claudin 7 + - ND Claudin 8 M+ C+ ND CD117 + + - RCCma - - + CAIX - - + KIM-1 - - + Vim - - + Abbreviations: C, cytoplasmic; ChRCC, chromophobe renal cell carcinoma; CRCC, clear cell renal cell carcinoma; M, membranous. (a) Please refer to Tables 1 and 2 for definitions of symbols and antibody abbreviations. Table 6. Differential Diagnosis of Renal Cell Tumors With Both Clear Cell and Papillary Features (a) Marker CPRCC CRCC PRCC TRCC CK7 + - + -/focally + CAIX + + Focally + Focally + P504S - -/+ + + CD10 -/focal + + +/- + 34BE12 +/- - - - Paraf N+ - -/+ ND RCCma - + + + TFE3 - - - + GLUT1 + + - ND Abbreviations: CPRCC, clearcell papillary renal cell carcinoma; CRCC, clear cell renal cell carcinoma; N, nuclear staining; PRCC, papillary renal cell carcinoma; TRCC, Xp11 translocation renal cell carcinoma. (a) Please refer to Tables 1 and 2 for definitions of symbols and antibody abbreviations. Table 7. Differential Diagnosis of Renal Cell Tumors With Papillary Featuresa Marker PRCC MTSCC Metanephric Adenoma CK7 + + - P504S + + - RCCma + +/- - S100 - - + WT1 - - + CD57 - - + Abbreviations: MTSCC, mucinous tubular and spindle cell carcinoma; PRCC, papillary renal cell carcinoma. (a) Please refer to Tables 1 and 2 for definitions of symbols and antibody abbreviations. Table 8. Differential Diagnosis of High-Grade Renal Epithelial Tumors (a) Marker UUC CDC RMC CRCC PRCC TRCC CK7 + + + - +/- -/focal + CK20 +/- - - - -/+ - CK903 + +/- - - - - p63 + - - - - - PAX8 -/+ + + + + + INI-1 + +/- - + + + OCT4 - - +/- - - - GATA3 + - - - - - TFE3 - - - - - + Abbreviations: CDC, collecting duct carcinoma; CRCC, clear cell renal cell carcinoma; PRCC, papillary renal cell carcinoma; RMC, renal medullary carcinoma; TRCC, Xp11 translocation renal cell carcinoma; UUC, upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma. (a) Please refer to Tables 1 and 2 for definitions of symbols and antibody abbreviations. Table 9. Common Metastases in the Kidney (a,b) Antibodies RCC ACC Lung Melanoma Breast GI Ovary EMA + - + - + + + CK7 - - + - + + + CK20 - - - - - +/- - TTF-1 - - + - - - - Napsin A -/+ - + - - - - GATA3 - - - - + - - ER - - - - + - + CDX2 - - - - - +/- - WT1 - - - - - - + S100 +/- - -/+ + -/+ - - ER - - - - + - + pVHL + - - - - - - KIM-1 + - - - - - - PAX8 + - - - - - + RCCma + - - - - - - Mart-1 - + - + - - - SF-1 - + - - - - - Calretinin - + - - - - - Abbreviations: ACC, adrenal cortical carcinoma; Breast, breast carcinoma; GI, upper gastrointestinal adenocarcinoma; Lung, lung adenocarcinoma; Ovary, ovarian serous carcinoma; RCC, renal cell carcinoma. (a) Please refer to Tables 1 and 2 for definitions of symbols and antibody abbreviations. (b) Both pVHL and KIM-1 frequently show positivity in ovarian and uterine clear cell carcinomas. Table 10. Recommended Panel for Evaluation of Flat Urothelial Lesions (a) Normal Antibodies Urothelium Reactive Atypia CK20 Patchy staining, Patchy staining, confined to umbrella confined to umbrella cells cells CD44 Patchy staining, Staining occurs in confined to basal basal, intermediate, cells and deep and umbrella cells intermediate cells p53 Commonly absent; if Commonly absent; if positive, usually in a positive, usually in a few basal cells and few basal and weak intensity intermediate cells and weak intensity Ki-67 Up to 10% of basal Still see low percentage cells stain of cells staining, but may see in both basal and intermediate cells Urothelial Urothelial Antibodies Hyperplasia Dysplasia CK20 Patchy staining, Staining occurs in confined to umbrella basal, intermediate, cells and umbrella cells CD44 75% of cases Absent, or patchy demonstrate staining staining may occur in only in basal cells; basal cells 25% have staining in both basal and intermediate cells p53 Commonly absent; if May be absent, but positive, usually in a usually see staining few basal and in some basal and intermediate cells intermediate cells and weak intensity (more than reactive or hyperplasia) and slightly stronger intensity Ki-67 Still see low percentage See increase in number of cells staining, but of cells staining, may may see in both basal see in all layers and intermediate cells Urothelial Antibodies Carcinoma In Situ CK20 Staining occurs in basal, intermediate, and umbrella cells CD44 Absent, or patchy staining may occur in basal cells p53 Stains cells in all layers, with increase in both number and intensity Ki-67 Marked increase in number of cells staining, usually in all layers Please refer to Table 2 for definitions of antibody abbreviations. Table 11. Useful Markers in the Differential Diagnoses of Nephrogenic Adenoma (NA) (a) Antibodies NA PCyst PapUN PAX8 + - PAX2 + - -/+ Ki-67 0%-5% + 1%-7% + -/+ p53 -, or weakly + -, or weakly + -, or weakly + p63 - + + PSA - - - CK7 + + + CK20 +/-b +c + Antibodies Prost CCU PAX8 - + PAX2 - +/- Ki-67 ND 10%-80% + p53 ND Strongly + p63 -/+ - PSA + - CK7 - + CK20 -/+ +/- Abbreviations: CCU, clearcell carcinoma of urothelial origin; Pap UN, papillary urothelial neoplasm; PCyst, polypoid cystitis; Prost, ectopic prostatic tissue and prostatic adenocarcinoma. (a) Please refer to Tables 1 and 2 for definitions of symbols and antibody abbreviations. (b) Focal staining seen in nephrogenic adenoma occurring in the bladder, but not in the prostatic urethra. (c) Staining confined to umbrella cells. Table 12. Recommended Markers for Tumors With Micropapillary Morphology (a) Antibodies UCaMic Breast Lung Ovary MesoEpi CK20 + - - or + - - TTF-1 - - + - - Napsin A - - + - - ER - + - or + + - Mamma - + or - - - - GATA-3 + + or - (b) - - ND Calret ND - or + - or + - or + + PAX8 - - - + - WT1 - - - + + or - Abbreviations: Breast, breast adenocarcinoma; Lung, lung adenocarcinoma; MesoEpi, epithelioid malignant mesothelioma; Ovary, serous ovarian adenocarcinoma; UCaMic, invasive urothelial carcinoma, micropapillary variant. (a) Please refer to Tables 1 and 2 for definitions of symbols and antibody abbreviations. (b) GATA3 shows positivity in 90% of ductal adenocarcinomas, 48% of lobular carcinomas. Table 13. Recommended Markers for Tumors With Plasmacytoid Morphology (a) Antibodies UCaPl PrBlsrc Plasma Breast Stomach CK7 + - + + + or - CK20 + or - - + - + or - GATA3 + ND ND + (b) - CD138 + + - ND ND LCA - + - - - Synap - - - - Chrom - - S100 - - - + Desmin - - - Antibodies Para/NEC Mel-s RMS CK7 - or + - - CK20 - - - GATA3 - - ND CD138 - - - LCA - - - Synap + - + Chrom + - S100 + (c) + - Desmin - - + Abbreviations: Breast, breast adenocarcinoma; Mel/s, malignant melanoma of skin origin; Para/NEC, paraganglioma and neuroendocrine carcinoma; Plasma, plasmacytoma; PrBlsrc, primary bladder adenocarcinoma, signet ring cell type; RMS, rhabdomyosarcoma; Stomach, gastric adenocarcinoma; UCaPl, invasive urothelial carcinoma, plasmacytoid variant. (a) Please refer to Tables 1 and 2 for definitions of symbols and antibody abbreviations. (b) GATA3 shows positivity in 90% of ductal adenocarcinomas, 48% of lobular carcinomas. (c) S100 stains sustentacular cells only. Table 14. Recommended Markers for Tumors With Nested Morphology (a) Antibodies UCNest vonB Para Carcn Mel-s Ki-67 -/+ (b) - or rare + Rare + ND (c) ND (d) CK AE1/AE3 + + -/+ + -/+ CK20 + -/+ (e) - - - Chrom - - + + - Synap - - + + - S100 - - +f - + Abbreviations: Carcn, carcinois; Mel-s, malignant melanoma of skin origin; Para, paraganglioma; UCNest, invasive urothelial carcinoma, nested variant; vonB, von Brunn nests. (a) Please refer to Tables 1 and 2 for definitions of symbols and antibody abbreviations. (b) If tumor stains, usually more than 15% of nuclei are positive. (c) Ki-67 expression is discussed in the literature as a prognostic factor in carcinoids of pulmonary and gastrointestinal origin, but not in the urothelial tract. (d) Ki-67 expression is discussed in the literature as a prognostic factor in skin melanoma but has not been reported in melanoma either primary or metastatic to the urothelial tract. (e) Few scattered cells may be positive, but not diffusely throughout the nest structures. (f) Stains sustentacular cells only. Table 15. Markers in the Differential of Urothelial Adenocarcinoma (a) Antibodies UC UAdC ColAd PrAd CxAd OAd EnAd RCC CK7 + +/- -/+ - + + + - CK20 +/- +/- + -/+ - +/- - - GATA3 + CDX2 - -/+ + - - -/+ -/+ - PSA - - - + - - - - CA 125 -/+ +/- -/+ - + + + - Vim -/+ -/+ +/- + PAX8 -/+ - - - +/- +/- + + Abbreviations: ColAd, colonic adenocarcinoma; CxAd, cervical adenocarcinoma; EnAd, endometrial adenocarcinoma; OAd, serous ovarian adenocarcinoma; PrAd, prostatic adenocarcinoma; RCC, clear cell renal cell carcinoma; UAdC, primary urothelial adenocarcinoma; UC, urothelial carcinoma. (a) Please refer to Tables 1 and 2 for definitions of symbols and antibody abbreviations. Table 16. Markers in Spindle Cell Neoplasms of the Bladder (a,b) Antibodies IMT SFT LMY LMS RMS SarUC CK AE1/AE3 -/+ - - +/- -/+ + CD34 - + +/- +/- -/+ - p53 -/+ (c) - - + -/+ +/- ALK-1 +/- - - -/+ -/+ - MyoD1 - - ND - + ND p63 - - -/+ (d) -/+ (d) + (e) +/- (f) Abbreviations: IMT, inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor; LMS, leiomyosarcoma; LMY, leiomyoma; RMS, rhabdomyosarcoma; SarUC, sarcomatoid urothelial carcinoma; SFT, solitary fibrous tumor. (a) Please refer to Tables 1 and 2 for definitions of symbols and antibody abbreviations. (b) Vimentin, smooth muscle actin, muscle-specific actin, and desmin may show positivity in all neoplasms in this table. S100 shows negativity in all neoplasms in this table. (c) If positive, usually weak intensity. (d) May show focal and weak cytoplasmic staining, not nuclear staining. (e) Cytoplasm stains (not nucleus) and the stain highlights cross-striations if present. (f) May be positive in spindle cell component. Table 17. Markers Recommended in the Differential of Germ Cell Tumors (a,b) Antibodies ITGCN CS SS EC YST CC PLAP + + - + -/+ +/- OCT4 + + - + (c) - - SALL4 + + + + + + Nanog + + - + - - CK AE1/AE3 - -/+ - + + + (d) CD30 - - - + - - AFP - - - -/+ + (e) - GPC3 - - - -/+ + (f) -/+ hCG - - - - - + (g) Abbreviations: CC, choriocarcinoma; CS, classic seminoma; EC, embryonal carcinoma; ITGCN, intratubular germ cell neoplasia; SS, spermatocytic seminoma; YST, yolk sac tumor. (a) Please refer to Tables 1 and 2 for definitions of symbols and antibody abbreviations. (b) CD10 will also stain syncytiotrophoblast and intermediate trophoblastin yolk sac tumors. CD44 shows positivity in ITGCN and CS. (c) Demonstrates both cytoplasmic and nuclear staining. (d) Positive in syncytiotrophoblast, intermediate trophoblast, and cyto -trophoblast. (e) Positive staining is often patchy and granular, but columnar cell of Schiller-Duval bodies do not stain, and hyaline globules only stain around the edges. (f) Stains all patterns of yolk sac tumor. (g) Positive in syncytiotrophoblast and intermediate trophoblast, but negative in cytotrophoblast. Table 18. Markers Useful to Distinguish Between Germ Cell Tumors and Sex Cord/Stromal Tumors (a,b) Antibodies GCT (c) SS SCST PLAP + - - SALL4 + + - OCT4 + - - Nanog + - - INHA - - + Calret - - + Abbreviations: GCT, germ cell tumor; SCST, sex cord/stromal tumor; SS, spermatocytic seminoma. (a) Please refer to Tables 1 and 2 for definitions of symbols and antibody abbreviations. (b) SF-1 is a good marker for steroidogenic tumors, including Leydig cell tumors and Sertoli cell tumors, and it shows negativity in all GCTs; however, there is no published data on its expression in the other SCSTs. (c) Includes all germ cell tumors except spermatocytic seminoma. Table 19. Markers Recommended in the Differential of Sex Cord/Stromal Tumors (a) Antibodies LCT SCT AdGrCT JuGrCT LCCSCT INHA + + + + + Calret + + + + + Vim + + + + + GAL-3 + - ND - ND SF-1 + + ND ND ND SMA - +/- + +/- + Desmin -/+ +/- -/+ -/+ + Abbreviations: AdGrCT, adult granulosa cell tumor; JuGrCT, juvenile granulosa cell tumor; LCCSCT, large cell calcifying Sertoli cell tumor; LCT, Leydig cell tumor; SCT, Sertoli cell tumor. (a) Please refer to Tables 1 and 2 for definitions of symbols and antibody abbreviations. Table 20. Markers Useful in the Diagnosis of Paratesticular Tumors (a,b) Antibodies SeCR ReteAC AdT MMeso PSCE PMCE EpAC CK AE1/AE3 + + + + ND ND + EMA - + + -/+ + + + Calret + -/+ + + ND ND +/- WT1 ND - + + ND - + CEA ND -/+ - - + + +/- CD15 - +/- - - + +c +/- ER ND - - - + ND + PAX8 ND + - - + - ND Abbreviations: AdT, adenomatoid tumor; EpAC, epididymal adenocar -cinoma; MMeso, malignant mesothelioma; PMCE, papillary mucinous cystadenoma of epididymis; PSCE, papillary serous cystadenoma of epididymis; ReteAC, adenocarcinoma of rete testis; SeCR, sertoliform cystadenoma of rete testis. (a) Please refer to Tables 1 and 2 for definitions of symbols and antibody abbreviations. (b) CK5/6 shows positivity in malignant mesothelioma, but negativity in adenocarcinomas of the rete testis and epididymis; CK20 shows negativity in malignant mesothelioma but shows positivity in papillary mucinous cystadenoma and adenocarcinoma of the epididymis. (c) Focal staining only. Table. 21 Markers Useful in the Differential of Adenocarcinoma in the Male Pelvisa Antibodies SVAC (b) PrAC CoRAC UAdC Wolf (c) CA 125 + - - - ND CK7 + - - + + CK20 - - + - - PSA - + - - - CDX2 - - + -/+ ND PAX8 + - - - + Abbreviations: CoRAC, colorectal adenocarcinoma; PrAC, adenocar -cinoma of prostate; SVAC, adenocarcinoma of seminal vesicle; UAdC, adenocarcinoma of urinary bladder; Wolf, wolffian adnexal tumor of seminal vesicle. (a) Please refer to Tables 1 and 2 for definitions of symbols and antibody abbreviations. (b) Endometrioid seminal vesicle adenocarcinoma is positive for vimentin and estrogen and progesterone receptors. (c) Wolffian adenexal tumors of the seminal vesicle are also positive for vimentin, CD10, and calretinin, but are negative for WT1, CEA, S100, and estrogen and progesterone receptors.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Author:||Wilkerson, Myra L.; Lin, Fan; Liu, Haiyan; Cheng, Liang|
|Publication:||Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine|
|Date:||Dec 1, 2014|
|Previous Article:||Standardization of Diagnostic Immunohistochemistry: Literature Review and Geisinger Experience.|
|Next Article:||Overview of Automated Immunohistochemistry.|