Differential Immunohistochemical Profiles for Distinguishing Prostate Carcinoma and Urothelial Carcinoma

被引:25
|
作者
Oh, Woo Jin [1 ]
Chung, Arthur Minwoo [1 ]
Kim, Jee Soon [1 ]
Han, Ji Heun [1 ]
Hong, Sung Hoo [2 ]
Lee, Ji Yeol [2 ]
Choi, Yeong Jin [1 ]
机构
[1] Catholic Univ Korea, Seoul St Marys Hosp, Coll Med, Dept Hosp Pathol, 222 Banpo Daero, Seoul, South Korea
[2] Catholic Univ Korea, Seoul St Marys Hosp, Coll Med, Dept Urol, 222 Banpo Daero, Seoul, South Korea
关键词
Prostatic adenocarcinoma; Urinary bladder; Immunohistochemistry; Pathologic diagnosis; Urothelial carcinoma;
D O I
10.4132/jptm.2016.06.14
中图分类号
R36 [病理学];
学科分类号
100104 ;
摘要
Background: The pathologic distinction between high-grade prostate adenocarcinoma (PAC) involving the urinary bladder and high-grade urothelial carcinoma (UC) infiltrating the prostate can be difficult. However, making this distinction is clinically important because of the different treatment modalities for these two entities. Methods: A total of 249 patient cases (PAC, 111 cases; UC, 138 cases) collected between June 1995 and July 2009 at Seoul St. Mary's Hospital were studied. An immunohistochemical evaluation of prostatic markers (prostate-specific antigen [PSA], prostate-specific membrane antigen [PSMA], prostate acid phosphatase [PAP], P501s, NKX3.1, and a-methylacyl coenzyme A racemase [AMACR]) and urothelial markers (CK34 beta E12, p63, thrombomodulin, S100P, and GATA binding protein 3 [GATA3]) was performed using tissue microarrays from each tumor. Results: The sensitivities of prostatic markers in PAC were 100% for PSA, 83.8% for PSMA, 91.9% for PAP, 93.7% for P501s, 88.3% for NKX 3.1, and 66.7% for AMACR. However, the urothelial markers CK34 beta E12, p63, thrombomodulin, S100P, and GATA3 were also positive in 1.8%, 0%, 0%, 3.6%, and 0% of PAC, respectively. The sensitivities of urothelial markers in UC were 75.4% for CK34 beta E12, 73.9% for p63, 45.7% for thrombomodulin, 22.5% for S100P, and 84.8% for GATA3. Conversely, the prostatic markers PSA, PSMA, PAP, P501s, NKX3.1, and AMACR were also positive in 9.4%, 0.7%, 18.8%, 0.7%, 0%, and 8.7% of UCs, respectively. Conclusions: Prostatic and urothelial markers, including PSA, NKX3.1, p63, thrombomodulin, and GATA3 are very useful for differentiating PAC from UC. The optimal combination of prostatic and urothelial markers could improve the ability to differentiate PAC from UC pathologically.
引用
收藏
页码:345 / 354
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Morphological and Immunohistochemical Biomarkers in Distinguishing Prostate Carcinoma and Urothelial Carcinoma: A Comprehensive Review
    Sanguedolce, Francesca
    Russo, Davide
    Mancini, Vito
    Selvaggio, Oscar
    Calo, Beppe
    Carrieri, Giuseppe
    Cormio, Luigi
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGICAL PATHOLOGY, 2019, 27 (02) : 120 - 133
  • [2] Immunohistochemical differential diagnosis between urothelial carcinoma and prostate adenocarcinoma among Egyptian patients
    Sakr, Saber A.
    Abdel-Wahed, Moshera M.
    El-Sahra, Doaa G.
    BIOMEDICINE & PHARMACOTHERAPY, 2014, 68 (06) : 685 - 692
  • [3] Immunohistochemical differentiation of high-grade prostate carcinoma from urothelial carcinoma
    Chuang, Ai-Ying
    DeMarzo, Angelo M.
    Veltri, Robert W.
    Sharma, Rajni B.
    Bieberich, Charles J.
    Epstein, Jonathan I.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL PATHOLOGY, 2007, 31 (08) : 1246 - 1255
  • [4] Clinical, Molecular and Immunohistochemical Profiles Of Nested Subtype Of Urothelial Carcinoma
    Yerebakan, Merve Basar
    Clinton, Timothy
    Whiting, Karissa
    Chu, Carissa
    Ozcan, Gamze Gokturk
    Akbulut, Dilara
    Chen, Jie-Fu
    Sarungbam, Judy
    Chen, Ying-Bei
    Gopalan, Anuradha
    Sirintrapun, S. Joseph
    Fine, Samson
    Iyer, Gopa
    Bochner, Bernard
    Solit, David
    Al-Ahmadie, Hikmat
    LABORATORY INVESTIGATION, 2023, 103 (03) : S694 - S695
  • [5] Utility of the laminin immunohistochemical stain in distinguishing invasive from noninvasive urothelial carcinoma
    Pradhan, Dinesh
    Amin, Milon
    Hooda, Shveta
    Dhir, Rajiv
    Bastacky, Sheldon
    Parwani, Anil V.
    JOURNAL OF CANCER RESEARCH AND THERAPEUTICS, 2017, 13 (06) : 947 - 950
  • [6] Immunohistochemical characterization of urothelial carcinoma
    Rajcani, J.
    Kajo, K.
    Adamkov, M.
    Moravekova
    Lauko, L.
    Felcanova, D.
    Bencat, M.
    BRATISLAVA MEDICAL JOURNAL-BRATISLAVSKE LEKARSKE LISTY, 2013, 114 (08): : 431 - 438
  • [7] UROTHELIAL CARCINOMA IN PROSTATE
    DHOM, G
    MOHR, G
    UROLOGE-AUSGABE A, 1977, 16 (02): : 70 - 72
  • [8] Urothelial carcinoma of the prostate
    Palou, Juan
    Baniel, Jack
    Klotz, Laurence
    Wood, David
    Cookson, Michael
    Lerner, Seth
    Horie, Shigeo
    Schoenberg, Mark
    Angulo, Javier
    Bassi, Pierfranco
    UROLOGY, 2007, 69 : 50 - 61
  • [9] Utility of GATA-3 and ERG Immunohistochemistry in Distinguishing Between Intraductal Urothelial Carcinoma in the Prostate and Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate
    Wu, Angela
    Palanisamy, Nallasivam
    Siddiqui, Javed
    Kunju, L. Priya
    LABORATORY INVESTIGATION, 2015, 95 : 268A - 268A
  • [10] Utility of GATA-3 and ERG Immunohistochemistry in Distinguishing Between Intraductal Urothelial Carcinoma in the Prostate and Intraductal Carcinoma of the Prostate
    Wu, Angela
    Palanisamy, Nallasivam
    Siddiqui, Javed
    Kunju, L. Priya
    MODERN PATHOLOGY, 2015, 28 : 268A - 268A