Journal of clinical pathology · 2024
Analysis of PRAME immunocytochemistry in 109 acral malignant melanoma in situ.
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.
Miao Qiu-Ju, Zang Jie, Shao Xue-Bao, Sun Jian-Fang, Chen Yan-Ping, Chen Hao
Аннотация
AIMS: Preferentially expressed antigen in melanoma (PRAME) recently is a reliable immunohistochemistry (IHC) marker for distinguishing melanoma from other lesions. However, there are few articles focused on PRAME use in acral malignant melanoma, the most common type in Asians. This study investigated PRAME IHC expression in a large series of acral malignant melanoma in situ to add to the body of clinical knowledge.
METHODS: PRAME IHC was performed in unequivocal cases of primary acral lentiginous melanoma in situ (ALMIS), subungual melanoma in situ (SMIS) and acral recurrent nevi as the control. PRAME tumour cell percentage positivity and intensity were expressed as categorised in a cumulative score by adding the quartile of positive tumour cells to intensity labelling. The final IHC expression was interpreted as negative (0-1), weak (2-3), moderate (4-5) or strong (6-7).
RESULTS: In 91 ALMIS patients, 32 cases (35.16%) were strong, 37 (40.66%) were moderate and 22 (24.18%) were weak. In 18 SMIS patients, strong positivity of PRAME was observed in 4 (22.22%) cases, moderate in 10 (55.56%) and weak in the remaining 4 (22.22%). No melanoma sample was negative for PRAME. By comparison, only 2 of the 40 acral recurrent nevi cases were positive.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study supports the ancillary value of PRAME for diagnosing ALMIS and SMIS with high sensitivity and specificity.
METHODS: PRAME IHC was performed in unequivocal cases of primary acral lentiginous melanoma in situ (ALMIS), subungual melanoma in situ (SMIS) and acral recurrent nevi as the control. PRAME tumour cell percentage positivity and intensity were expressed as categorised in a cumulative score by adding the quartile of positive tumour cells to intensity labelling. The final IHC expression was interpreted as negative (0-1), weak (2-3), moderate (4-5) or strong (6-7).
RESULTS: In 91 ALMIS patients, 32 cases (35.16%) were strong, 37 (40.66%) were moderate and 22 (24.18%) were weak. In 18 SMIS patients, strong positivity of PRAME was observed in 4 (22.22%) cases, moderate in 10 (55.56%) and weak in the remaining 4 (22.22%). No melanoma sample was negative for PRAME. By comparison, only 2 of the 40 acral recurrent nevi cases were positive.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study supports the ancillary value of PRAME for diagnosing ALMIS and SMIS with high sensitivity and specificity.