View Item 

Show simple item record

Utility of PAX8 and PAX2 immunohistochemistry in the identification of renal cell carcinoma in diagnostic cytology

dc.contributor.authorKnoepp, Stewart M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorKunju, Lakshmi P.en_US
dc.contributor.authorRoh, Michael H.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-08-09T14:55:27Z
dc.date.available2013-10-01T17:06:31Zen_US
dc.date.issued2012-08en_US
dc.identifier.citationKnoepp, Stewart M.; Kunju, Lakshmi P.; Roh, Michael H. (2012). "Utility of PAX8 and PAX2 immunohistochemistry in the identification of renal cell carcinoma in diagnostic cytology." Diagnostic Cytopathology 40(8): 667-672. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/92391>en_US
dc.identifier.issn8755-1039en_US
dc.identifier.issn1097-0339en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/92391
dc.description.abstractThe diagnosis of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in cytology specimens may be difficult to confirm on the basis of cytomorphology alone. Often, immunohistochemistry serves as an important adjunct in confirming this diagnosis. Recently, PAX2 was shown to be useful in this regard. In this study, we sought to compare the utility of PAX8 to that of PAX2 immunohistochemistry in the diagnosis of RCC in cytology specimens. First, we verified the performance of PAX8 immunohistochemistry on a tissue microarray (TMA) composed of 54 cases of RCC; PAX8 immunoreactivity was seen in at least 10% of the tumor cells in all cases. Next, we applied PAX8 immunohistochemistry to cell block sections prepared from 24 cases of RCC, obtained from fine‐needle aspirates and effusion specimens. PAX2 immunohistochemistry was performed for comparison. Immunopositivity was defined as the presence of nuclear staining in at least 10% of tumor cell nuclei. Immunoreactivity for PAX8 and PAX2 was seen in 21 (88%) and 20 (83%) of the 24 cases, respectively. The presence of either PAX8 or PAX2 immunostaining was present in 22 of 24 cases, thus showing a total sensitivity of 92%. Overall, the results indicate that PAX8 and PAX2 are diagnostically useful adjuncts in confirming the diagnosis of RCC in cytology specimens. Diagn. Cytopathol. 2012. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.publisherWiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Companyen_US
dc.subject.otherCytologyen_US
dc.subject.otherPAX8en_US
dc.subject.otherPAX2en_US
dc.subject.otherRenal Cell Carcinomaen_US
dc.subject.otherFine‐Needle Aspirationen_US
dc.titleUtility of PAX8 and PAX2 immunohistochemistry in the identification of renal cell carcinoma in diagnostic cytologyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPathologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationum2G332 UH, Department of Pathology, University of Michigan Health System, 1500 E. Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumDepartment of Pathology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michiganen_US
dc.identifier.pmid22807381en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/92391/1/21590_ftp.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/dc.21590en_US
dc.identifier.sourceDiagnostic Cytopathologyen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLaury AR, Hornick JL, Perets R, et al. PAX8 reliably distinguishes ovarian serous tumors from malignant mesothelioma. Am J Surg Pathol 2010; 34: 627 – 635.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRoh MH, Dal Cin P, Silverman SG, Cibas ES. The application of cytogenetics and fluorescence in situ hybridization to fine‐needle aspiration in the diagnosis and subclassification of renal neoplasms. Cancer Cytopathol 2010; 118: 137 – 145.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWu A, Kunju LP, Cheng L, Shah RB. Renal cell carcinoma in children and young adults: Analysis of clinicopathological, immunohistochemical and molecular characteristics with an emphasis on the spectrum of Xp11.2 translocation‐associated and unusual clear cell subtypes. Histopathology 2008; 53: 533 – 544.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDressler GR. The specification and maintenance of renal cell types by epigenetic factors. Organogenesis 2009; 5: 73 – 82.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBowen NJ, Logani S, Dickerson EB, et al. Emerging roles for PAX8 in ovarian cancer and endosalpingeal development. Gynecol Oncol 2007; 104: 331 – 337.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRoh MH, Kindelberger D, Crum CP. Serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma and the dominant ovarian mass clues to serous tumor origin? Am J Surg Pathol 2009; 33: 376 – 383.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTong GX, Chiriboga L, Hamele‐Bena D, Borczuk AC. Expression of PAX2 in papillary serous carcinoma of the ovary: Immunohistochemical evidence of fallopian tube or secondary Mullerian system origin? Mod Pathol 2007; 20: 856 – 863.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTung CS, Mok SC, Tsang YT, et al. PAX2 expression in low malignant potential ovarian tumors and low‐grade ovarian serous carcinomas. Mod Pathol 2009; 22: 1243 – 1250.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChivukula M, Dabbs DJ, O'Connor S, Bhargava R. PAX 2: A novel Mullerian marker for serous papillary carcinomas to differentiate from micropapillary breast carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Pathol 2009; 28: 570 – 578.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGokden 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: 1462 – 1467.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGokden N, Kemp SA, Gokden M. The utility of Pax‐2 as an immunohistochemical marker for renal cell carcinoma in cytopathology. Diagn Cytopathol 2008; 36: 473 – 477.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTong GX, Melamed J, Mansukhani M, et al. PAX2: A reliable marker for nephrogenic adenoma. Mod Pathol 2006; 19: 356 – 363.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAlbadine 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 J Surg Pathol 2010; 34: 965 – 969.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTong GX, Yu WM, Beaubier NT, et al. Expression of PAX8 in normal and neoplastic renal tissues: An immunohistochemical study. Mod Pathol 2009; 22: 1218 – 1227.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcKnight R, Cohen C, Siddiqui MT. Utility of paired box gene 8 (PAX8) expression in fluid and fine‐needle aspiration cytology: An immunohistochemical study of Metastatic ovarian serous carcinoma. Cancer Cytopathol 2010; 118: 298 – 302.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTong GX, Devaraj K, Hamele‐Bena D, et al. PAX8: A marker for carcinoma of Mullerian origin in serous effusions. Diagn Cytopathol 2010 [e‐pub ahead of print].en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWiseman W, Michael CW, Roh MH. Diagnostic utility of PAX8 and PAX2 immunohistochemistry in the identification of metastatic Mullerian carcinoma in effusions. Diagn Cytopathol 2010 [e‐pub ahead of print].en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWasco MJ, Pu RT. Comparison of PAX‐2. RCC antigen, and antiphosphorylated H2AX antibody (gamma‐H2AX) in diagnosing metastatic renal cell carcinoma by fine‐needle aspiration. Diagn Cytopathol 2008; 36: 568 – 573.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOzcan A, Zhai J, Hamilton C, et al. PAX‐2 in the diagnosis of primary renal tumors: Immunohistochemical comparison with renal cell carcinoma marker antigen and kidney‐specific cadherin. Am J Clin Pathol 2009; 131: 393 – 404.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceZhai QJ, Ozcan A, Hamilton C, et al. PAX‐2 expression in non‐neoplastic, primary neoplastic, and metastatic neoplastic tissue: A comprehensive immunohistochemical study. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 2010; 18: 323 – 332.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePan 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: 452 – 459.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWasco MJ, Pu RT. Utility of antiphosphorylated H2AX antibody (gamma‐H2AX) in diagnosing metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 2008; 16: 349 – 356.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBakshi N, Kunju LP, Giordano T, Shah RB. Expression of renal cell carcinoma antigen (RCC) in renal epithelial and nonrenal tumors: Diagnostic Implications. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 2007; 15: 310 – 315.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJemal A, Siegel R, Xu J, Ward E. Cancer Statistics, 2010. CA Cancer J Clin 2010; 60: 277 – 300.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMurphy W, Grignon DJ, Perlman EJ. Tumors of the kidney, bladder, and related urinary structures. In: Steven G, Silverberg M, editors. Washington, DC: American Registry of Pathology; 2004. 394 p.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOhnishi H, Abe M, Hamada H, et al. Metastatic renal cell carcinoma presenting as multiple pleural tumours. Respirology 2005; 10: 128 – 131.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSingla R, Bhattacharya D, Chhabra SK, Menon MP. Pleural effusion in renal cell carcinoma—A rare presenting feature. Indian J Chest Dis Allied Sci 1987; 29: 29 – 35.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEllis CL, Burroughs F, Michael CW, Li QK. Cytology of metastatic renal medullary carcinoma in pleural effusion: A study of two cases. Diagn Cytopathol 2009; 37: 843 – 848.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePavlidis N, Briasoulis E, Hainsworth J, Greco FA. Diagnostic and therapeutic management of cancer of an unknown primary. Eur J Cancer 2003; 39: 1990 – 2005.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTruong LD, Todd TD, Dhurandhar B, Ramzy I. Fine‐needle aspiration of renal masses in adults: Analysis of results and diagnostic problems in 108 cases. Diagn Cytopathol 1999; 20: 339 – 349.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKunju LP, Wojno K, Wolf JS, Jr, Cheng L, Shah RB. Papillary renal cell carcinoma with oncocytic cells and nonoverlapping low grade nuclei: Expanding the morphologic spectrum with emphasis on clinicopathologic, immunohistochemical and molecular features. Hum Pathol 2008; 39: 96 – 101.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLeroy X, Farine MO, Buob D, Wacrenier A, Copin MC. Diagnostic value of cytokeratin 7. CD10 and mesothelin in distinguishing ovarian clear cell carcinoma from metastasis of renal clear cell carcinoma. Histopathology 2007; 51: 874 – 876.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
21590_ftp.pdf
Size:
1.216MB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.