Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center · 2006
Pathology of liver metastases.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание 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.
Centeno Barbara A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The liver is the most frequent site of metastatic disease, and metastatic disease to the liver is far more common than primary liver carcinoma in the United States. Pathologic evaluation of biopsy samples is key to establishing a correct diagnosis for patient management. Morphologic and immunoperoxidase studies, which are the standard for pathologic practice, accurately classify most tumors. Subclassification of carcinoma of unknown primary remains problematic.
METHODS: The author reviewed the literature for articles pertaining to liver biopsy, diagnosis of specific tumor types, utility of immunohistochemical markers, and microarray and proteomic analysis.
RESULTS: Sampling of liver lesions is best accomplished by combining fine-needle aspiration and needle core biopsy. Many malignancies have distinct morphologic and immunohistochemical patterns and can be correctly subclassified. Adenocarcinoma of unknown primary remains enigmatic since current immunohistochemical markers for this differential diagnosis lack specificity. Microarray analysis and proteomic analysis of tumors can provide distinct gene or protein expression profiles, respectively, for tumor classification. These technologies can be used with fine-needle aspiration and needle core biopsy samples.
CONCLUSIONS: Most metastatic malignancies in the liver may be correctly diagnosed using standard morphology and immunohistochemical techniques. However, subtyping of some carcinomas and identification of site of unknown primary remains problematic. New technologies may help to further refine our diagnostic capabilities.
METHODS: The author reviewed the literature for articles pertaining to liver biopsy, diagnosis of specific tumor types, utility of immunohistochemical markers, and microarray and proteomic analysis.
RESULTS: Sampling of liver lesions is best accomplished by combining fine-needle aspiration and needle core biopsy. Many malignancies have distinct morphologic and immunohistochemical patterns and can be correctly subclassified. Adenocarcinoma of unknown primary remains enigmatic since current immunohistochemical markers for this differential diagnosis lack specificity. Microarray analysis and proteomic analysis of tumors can provide distinct gene or protein expression profiles, respectively, for tumor classification. These technologies can be used with fine-needle aspiration and needle core biopsy samples.
CONCLUSIONS: Most metastatic malignancies in the liver may be correctly diagnosed using standard morphology and immunohistochemical techniques. However, subtyping of some carcinomas and identification of site of unknown primary remains problematic. New technologies may help to further refine our diagnostic capabilities.