Article

Nevogenesis: A Benign Metastatic Process?

Department of Dermatology and Cutaneous Surgery, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, FL 33136, USA.
ISRN dermatology 04/2011; 2011:813513. DOI: 10.5402/2011/813513
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT It is generally accepted that cutaneous nevogenesis is a localized event that occurs exclusively in the dermis and/or epidermis. However, the discovery of nevocytes circulating in the peripheral blood suggests that other, more systemic, benign metastatic processes could also be involved. The theoretical role of lymphatic and hematogenous dissemination of loosely adherent, immature nevus progenitor cells in the development of nodal nevi and eruptive melanocytic nevi will be reviewed.

Full-text

Available from: Andrew L Ross, Oct 30, 2014
1 Follower
 · 
138 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Melanoma progression is typically depicted as a linear and stepwise process in which metastasis occurs relatively late in disease progression. Significant evidence suggests that in a subset of melanomas, progression is much more complex and less linear in nature. Epidemiologic and experimental observations in melanoma metastasis are reviewed here and are incorporated into a comprehensive model for melanoma metastasis, which takes into account the varied natural history of melanoma formation and progression.Oncogene advance online publication, 3 June 2013; doi:10.1038/onc.2013.194.
    Oncogene 06/2013; DOI:10.1038/onc.2013.194 · 8.56 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Melanocytic neoplasms are a diverse group of benign and malignant tumors with variable clinical features. While some models still promote the epidermal melanocyte as the origin of melanocytic neoplasms, clinical findings are inconsistent with this theory for the majority of tumors. Despite advances in nevus and melanoma biology, the location and differentiation status of the cell of origin remains undefined. Germ line genetics, biological state and cellular location of the mutated cell, as well as local environmental factors all likely play a role in the development of melanocytic neoplasms. Herein, we will review potential models for melanocytic neoplasia and discuss research challenges and opportunities. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
    Experimental Dermatology 03/2014; 23(5). DOI:10.1111/exd.12363 · 4.12 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Lymph node nevi (NN) have been occasionally described, yet little is currently known on their origin. According to a theoretical model of nevogenesis, the dissemination of nevus progenitor cells through lymphatic routes is responsible for the development of both nodal and skin nevi. The true incidence of NN is largely unknown but it has been reported to vary from 0.017% to as high as 22%. The frequency of NN nevi has increased since the introduction of sentinel lymph node mapping as a routine prognostic procedure in breast cancer and melanoma. The aim of this study was to analyze the frequency and morphological findings of NN, to discuss possible pathogenetic pathways in their evolution, and to verify the consistency of p16 immunostaining in the critical differential approach between NN and melanoma metastases. We therefore morphologically and immunohistochemically evaluated a series of 60 NN from 58 patients. In 21 patients, the lymph nodes had been removed during the staging for a skin melanoma; in all these patients NN immunostaining with p16 was strongly positive and p16 proved to be a reliable marker for the crucial differential diagnosis between NN and melanoma metastasis, strongly reacting in NN and lacking in melanoma deposits. A deeper knowledge on NN could help to clarify some important topics such as lymph node metastatic melanoma with unknown primary and the current debate on the lymph node involvement from atypical spitzoid tumors. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.
    Pathology - Research and Practice 01/2015; 211(5). DOI:10.1016/j.prp.2015.01.003 · 1.56 Impact Factor