Article

D2-40 immunohistochemistry in the differential diagnosis of seminoma and embryonal carcinoma: a comparative immunohistochemical study with KIT (CD117) and CD30. Mod Pathol

Department of Pathology, City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, CA 91010, USA.
Modern Pathology (Impact Factor: 6.36). 04/2007; 20(3):320-5. DOI: 10.1038/modpathol.3800749
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The distinction between seminoma and embryonal carcinoma based on morphology alone can sometimes be problematic, requiring the use of immunohistochemistry to facilitate diagnosis. D2-40 is a monoclonal antibody that reacts with an oncofetal antigen expressed by fetal germ cells and testicular germ cell tumors. The diagnostic value of D2-40 immunohistochemistry in distinguishing seminoma from embryonal carcinoma has not been determined. D2-40 immunoreactivity was evaluated in a series of testicular germ cell tumors and compared with that of KIT (CD117) and CD30, to assess the relative utility of this marker in discriminating between seminoma and embryonal carcinoma. Forty testicular germ cell neoplasms were examined, which included 19 seminomas, three embryonal carcinomas, three teratomas, one yolk sac tumor, and 14 mixed germ cell tumors. The 14 cases of mixed germ cell tumors contained components of seminoma (n=7), embryonal carcinoma (n=11), teratoma (n=10), yolk sac tumor (n=2), and choriocarcinoma (n=1). All cases of pure seminoma and the seminomatous components of mixed germ cell tumors exhibited positive immunoreactivity for D2-40. Focal positivity for D2-40 was also observed in 29% of the embryonal carcinoma samples. D2-40 immunoreactivity in seminomas was characterized by diffuse membrane staining, whereas for embryonal carcinomas, staining was focal and distributed along the apical surfaces of the neoplastic cells. Immunohistochemical staining for KIT was observed in 92% of the seminoma samples and in none of the embryonal carcinomas. Conversely, CD30 expression was identified in 93% of the embryonal carcinoma samples and in none of the seminomas. Other germ cell components showed no immunoreactivity for D2-40, KIT, or CD30. KIT and CD30 are effective immunohistochemical markers in separating seminoma from embryonal carcinoma. Although a highly sensitive marker for seminomas, D2-40 positivity was also observed in a subset of embryonal carcinomas, thus limiting the utility of this antibody for discriminating between these two malignancies.

0 Followers
 · 
150 Views
  • Source
    • "Since the rate of testicular neoplasms is increasing, much research has been carried out to more accurately diagnose and manage these patients [2,11]. In particular, many immunohistochemical markers have been introduced to accurately establish histological diagnoses and to investigate tumor pathogenesis [3,18]. Markers including cytokeratins, c-KIT, CD30, epithelial membrane antigen, inhibin-alpha, OCT3/4, placental alkaline phosphatase (PLAP) and alpha fetoprotein (AFP) are sensitive and specific for the diagnosis of human testicular tumors [13,17,27,35]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Primary testicular tumors are the most common causes of cancer in male dogs. Overall, the majority of canine patients should be cured by testicular surgery. However, tumor markers are not well-known in veterinary medicine. We sought to determine using immunohistochemistry whether the combined human testicular tumor markers (placental alkaline phosphatase, OCT3/4, CD30, alpha-fetoprotein, inhibin-alpha, vimentin, c-KIT, and desmin) are expressed in canine seminomas and Sertoli cell tumors (SCTs). We examined 35 canine testicular tumors, 20 seminomas and 15 SCTs. c-KIT was expressed markedly in canine seminomas. Both inhibin-alpha and vimentin were expressed significantly in canine SCTs. The results of this study demonstrate differences and similarities between tumor marker expression of testicular tumors in dogs and humans. All the main markers in current routine use are discussed as well as potential useful markers for benign and malignant tumors, and tumor progression.
    Journal of Veterinary Science 04/2009; 10(1):1-7. DOI:10.4142/jvs.2009.10.1.1 · 1.14 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Journal of Clinical Pathology 01/1971; 30(6). DOI:10.1136/jcp.30.6.591-d · 2.55 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Undifferentiated malignant neoplasms are a daunting diagnostic problem for anatomical pathologists, calling for a tour de force in morphological skill, clinicopathologic correlation, and application of adjunctive laboratory studies. The most useful approach to these lesions begins with generic classification into 1 of 4 histologic categories: small round cell; spindle cell; large polygonal cell (epithelioid); and pleomorphic neoplasms. Once that step has been accomplished, one can systemically apply corresponding groups of antibody reagents in immunohistologic studies and interpret the results in an algorithmic fashion. This review presents the tumor markers that are the most useful in this contextual approach, as well as the specific algorithmic structures that can be applied to the 4 specified tumor groups. Other selected problems in the diagnosis of morphologically ambiguous tumors are considered as well.
    Annals of Diagnostic Pathology 03/2008; 12(1):72-84. DOI:10.1016/j.anndiagpath.2007.10.003 · 1.11 Impact Factor
Show more

Preview

Download
2 Downloads
Available from