American journal of clinical pathology · 2025
Site-discordant expression of myeloid cell nuclear differentiation antigen in blastic plasmacytoid dendritic cell neoplasm.
СтатьяКлинический случайНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bulterys Philip L, Saleem Atif, Brown Ryanne A, Novoa Roberto A, Rieger Kerri E, Natkunam Yasodha, Fernandez-Pol Sebastian
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Blastic plasmacytoid dendritic cell neoplasm (BPDCN) is a rare and aggressive hematologic neoplasm that can show clinical, morphologic, and immunophenotypic overlap with acute myeloid leukemia. Myeloid cell nuclear differentiation antigen (MNDA) is a nuclear protein expressed by myelomonocytic cells previously reported to be reliably absent in BPDCN and proposed as a useful adjunct for the distinction of BPDCN and acute myeloid leukemia. We encountered a case of BPDCN that showed strong nuclear expression of MNDA in bone marrow and breast samples and weak to absent expression in skin samples, prompting us to reevaluate the expression of MNDA in BPDCN.
METHODS: We collected all available BPDCN cases from the Stanford University archives collected in the past 10 years and subjected them to MNDA immunohistochemistry. In select cases, molecular profiling by next-generation sequencing was performed.
RESULTS: We found 4 cases (of 8 total examined [50%]) with convincing site-discordant MNDA expression. This expression was seen in 3 of 6 (50%) bone marrow samples, 1 of 2 (50%) breast soft tissue samples, and 3 of 14 (up to 21%) skin samples and was not obviously predicted by age, sex, history of myeloid neoplasm, or treatment history. In 2 cases, MNDA was strongly expressed in 2 distinct sites (breast/bone marrow, skin/bone marrow) and negative in subsequent samples.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that MNDA expression in BPDCN is anatomic site dependent and transient, with noncutaneous infiltrates showing more frequent expression than cutaneous infiltrates. These results caution against the use of MNDA to exclude BPDCN when considering the differential diagnosis of a blastic extramedullary infiltrate.
METHODS: We collected all available BPDCN cases from the Stanford University archives collected in the past 10 years and subjected them to MNDA immunohistochemistry. In select cases, molecular profiling by next-generation sequencing was performed.
RESULTS: We found 4 cases (of 8 total examined [50%]) with convincing site-discordant MNDA expression. This expression was seen in 3 of 6 (50%) bone marrow samples, 1 of 2 (50%) breast soft tissue samples, and 3 of 14 (up to 21%) skin samples and was not obviously predicted by age, sex, history of myeloid neoplasm, or treatment history. In 2 cases, MNDA was strongly expressed in 2 distinct sites (breast/bone marrow, skin/bone marrow) and negative in subsequent samples.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that MNDA expression in BPDCN is anatomic site dependent and transient, with noncutaneous infiltrates showing more frequent expression than cutaneous infiltrates. These results caution against the use of MNDA to exclude BPDCN when considering the differential diagnosis of a blastic extramedullary infiltrate.