Serous papillary adenocarcinoma of the female genital organs and invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast. Are WT1, CA125, and GCDFP-15 useful in differential diagnosis?
Serous papillary adenocarcinoma of the female genital organs and invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast. Are WT1, CA125, and GCDFP-15 useful in differential diagnosis?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.humpath.2007.09.009
复制
发表时间：
2008-05-01
期刊：
影响因子：
3.3
通讯作者：
Kushima, Ryoji
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Moritani, Suzuko;Ichihara, Shu;Kushima, Ryoji
女性生殖器的浆液性乳头状腺癌和乳腺浸润性微乳头状癌在组织学上有很大的相似性。因此，当这些癌症在同一患者中同时或异时发生时，很难确定原发部位。我们检查了23例浆液性乳头状腺癌（16例卵巢癌、5例子宫内膜癌和2例腹膜癌）和37例乳腺浸润性微乳头状癌（12例纯型和25例混合型）对Wilm肿瘤抗原-1（WT 1）、CA 125和大体囊性病液蛋白-15的免疫组织化学表达的影响（GCDFP-15），其已被报道可用于原发性卵巢癌与转移到卵巢的乳腺癌的鉴别诊断。WT 1、CA 125和GCDFP-15在浆液性乳头状腺癌中的阳性率分别为78%、78%和0%，在浸润性微乳头状癌中的阳性率分别为3%、40%和38%。浸润性微乳头状癌的CA 125阳性率高于其他类型乳腺癌。我们认为CA 125在浆液性乳头状腺癌和浸润性微乳头状癌的鉴别诊断中并不总是有用的。虽然WT 1在浆液性乳头状腺癌中的阳性率显著高于浸润性微乳头状癌，但WT 1在子宫内膜浆液性乳头状腺癌中的表达很少（20%）。WT 1和GCDFP-15可作为卵巢和腹膜浆液性乳头状腺癌与乳腺浸润性微乳头状腺癌鉴别诊断的有用指标。然而，由于GCDFP-15在浸润性微乳头状癌中的阳性率低，GCDFP-15的可用性受到限制。(C)2008年爱思唯尔公司All rights reserved.
Serous papillary adenocarcinoma of the female genital organs and invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast have close histologic similarities. Thus, when these cancers occur synchronously or metachronously in the same patient, it is difficult to determine the primary site. We examined 23 serous papillary adenocarcinomas (16 ovarian, 5 endometrial, and 2 peritoneal) and 37 invasive micropapillary carcinomas of the breast (12 pure and 25 mixed types) on immunohistochemical expression of Wilm's tumor antigen-1 (WT1), CA125, and gross cystic disease fluid protein-15 (GCDFP-15), which have been reported to be useful in the differential diagnosis of primary ovarian carcinomas versus metastatic breast cancer to the ovary. The positive rates of WT1, CA125, and GCDFP-15 in serous papillary adenocarcinomas were 78%, 78%, and 0%, respectively, and the corresponding rates in invasive micropapillary carcinomas were 3%, 40%, and 38%. The CA125-positive rate of invasive micropapillary carcinoma was higher than the rate reported for other types of breast carcinomas. We consider CA125 to be not always useful in the differential diagnosis of serous papillary adenocarcinoma and invasive micropapillary carcinoma. Although the positive rate of WT1 was significantly higher in serous papillary adenocarcinoma than in invasive micropapillary carcinoma, WT1 expression in endometrial serous papillary adenocarcinoma was infrequent (20%). WT1 and GCDFP-15 could be useful markers for the differential diagnosis of ovarian and peritoneal serous papillary adenocarcinoma versus breast invasive micropapillary adenocarcinoma. However, the availability of GCDFP-15 is limited because of the low positive rate of GCDFP-15 in invasive micropapillary carcinomas. (C) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.