Journal of cutaneous pathology · 2023
RB1 loss in the mesenchymal component of onychomatricoma.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Liu Yu, Zou Daopei, Huang Qiong, Wang Lei
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Onychomatricoma is a nail neoplasm that usually presents as longitudinal nail plate thickening, involving either the partial or whole nail. Histopathologically, it is characterized by deep invaginations of the proliferating nail matrix and proliferation of CD34+ and CD10+ spindle cells with collagenous to myxoid stroma. Onychomatricoma has been considered a fibroepithelial neoplasm. Recently, RB1 loss has been verified using array comparative genomic hybridization.
METHODS: This study investigated the RB1 status in onychomatricoma with morphological methods.
RESULTS: Six patients with onychomatricoma were included in the study. RB1 status was assessed using immunohistochemical staining and fluorescence in situ hybridization. Immunohistochemical staining showed that all six cases experienced RB1 loss in the mesenchymal component of onychomatricoma but not in the proliferated nail matrix. Fluorescence in situ hybridization in five cases showed a monoallelic deletion of the RB1 locus in the mesenchymal component but not in the proliferated nail matrix.
CONCLUSIONS: RB1 loss was observed only in the mesenchymal component of onychomatricoma. Our findings suggest that the proliferated nail matrix in onychomatricoma represents reactive hyperplasia of various degrees secondary to neoplastic mesenchymal proliferation. This indicates that onychomatricoma should be recognized as an RB1-deleted soft tissue neoplasm rather than a fibroepithelial neoplasm.
METHODS: This study investigated the RB1 status in onychomatricoma with morphological methods.
RESULTS: Six patients with onychomatricoma were included in the study. RB1 status was assessed using immunohistochemical staining and fluorescence in situ hybridization. Immunohistochemical staining showed that all six cases experienced RB1 loss in the mesenchymal component of onychomatricoma but not in the proliferated nail matrix. Fluorescence in situ hybridization in five cases showed a monoallelic deletion of the RB1 locus in the mesenchymal component but not in the proliferated nail matrix.
CONCLUSIONS: RB1 loss was observed only in the mesenchymal component of onychomatricoma. Our findings suggest that the proliferated nail matrix in onychomatricoma represents reactive hyperplasia of various degrees secondary to neoplastic mesenchymal proliferation. This indicates that onychomatricoma should be recognized as an RB1-deleted soft tissue neoplasm rather than a fibroepithelial neoplasm.