Literature DB >> 10937045

The immunophenotype of ependymomas.

K D Vege1, C Giannini, B W Scheithauer.   

Abstract

The morphologic distinction of ependymomas with epithelial cytology from metastatic carcinoma may pose a significant problem in differential diagnosis. The known presence of keratin in glioma cells further complicates the issue. Using the labeled streptavidin-biotin method with automated staining, we studied epithelial and glial marker expression in 52 ependymomas of varying type and grade, including 20 epithelial-appearing, 14 glial-appearing, eight mixed pattern, and 10 myxopapillary tumors; 38 were low grade and 14 anaplastic. All tumors were immunoreactive for glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), and S-100 protein. Diffuse staining for GFAP was noted in glial-appearing ependymomas featuring perivascular pseudorosettes. Diffuse immunostaining for S-100 protein was seen in cellular lesions exhibiting epithelial-like features. Staining was more diffuse for GFAP than S-100 protein in anaplastic ependymomas. Keratin (AE1/AE3) reactivity was seen in 98% of cases, the pattern being similar to that of GFAP. The frequency of staining for other keratins varied: wide-spectrum keratin (35%), cytokeratin (CK)7 (20%), CAM 5.2 (19%), CK903 (14%), and CK20 (8%); as a rule, it was scant and limited to occasional cells and processes. epithelial membrane antigen (EMA) staining was seen in 36% of all cases and in 67% of epithelial-appearing tumors wherein it often high-lighted microlumina. Aside from AE1/AE3 staining and very infrequent wide-spectrum keratin and EMA reactivity, expression of epithelial markers was not seen in anaplastic ependymomas. No carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) positivity was noted in any case. Collagen IV reactivity was limited to tumor cell-stroma interfaces. Although variable, S-100 protein and GFAP staining is seen in all ependymomas, particularly in true and perivascular pseudorosettes. Widespread reactivity for keratin AE1/AE3 corresponds closely to the pattern of GFAP staining. Significant staining for other keratins or for CEA is inconsistent with a diagnosis of ependymoma. EMA reactivity is largely limited to luminal staining of rosettes and tubules.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10937045     DOI: 10.1097/00129039-200003000-00004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol        ISSN: 1533-4058


  11 in total

1.  Epithelial and pseudoepithelial differentiation in glioblastoma and gliosarcoma: a comparative morphologic and molecular genetic study.

Authors:  Fausto J Rodriguez; Bernd W Scheithauer; Caterina Giannini; Sandra C Bryant; Robert B Jenkins
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2008-11-15       Impact factor: 6.860

2.  Immunohistochemical study of CD99 and EMA expression in ependymomas.

Authors:  Soheir Mahfouz; Ahmad Abdel Aziz; Samia M Gabal; Samar el-Sheikh
Journal:  Medscape J Med       Date:  2008-02-19

Review 3.  Ependymoma.

Authors:  Charles Teo; Peter Nakaji; Patricia Symons; Vivienne Tobias; Richard Cohn; Robert Smee
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2003-05-22       Impact factor: 1.475

4.  Epithelioid angiosarcoma of the septum pellucidum.

Authors:  Chiara Baldovini; Matteo Martinoni; Gianluca Marucci
Journal:  Case Rep Pathol       Date:  2013-09-19

5.  Immunohistochemical features of giant cell ependymoma of the filum terminale with unusual clinical and radiological presentation.

Authors:  Fernando Candanedo-Gonzalez; Cindy Sharon Ortiz-Arce; Samuel Rosales-Perez; Ana Lilia Remirez-Castellanos; Candelaria Cordova-Uscanga; Armando Gamboa-Dominguez
Journal:  Diagn Pathol       Date:  2017-01-14       Impact factor: 2.644

6.  Cerebellopontine angle ependymoma in a young adult: A case report.

Authors:  Zhigang Lan; Seidu A Richard; Yuekang Zhang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 1.817

7.  YAP1/TAZ drives ependymoma-like tumour formation in mice.

Authors:  Noreen Eder; Federico Roncaroli; Marie-Charlotte Domart; Stuart Horswell; Felipe Andreiuolo; Helen R Flynn; Andre T Lopes; Suzanne Claxton; John-Paul Kilday; Lucy Collinson; Jun-Hao Mao; Torsten Pietsch; Barry Thompson; Ambrosius P Snijders; Sila K Ultanir
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2020-05-13       Impact factor: 14.919

8.  GFAP-Negative Subcutaneous Sacrococcygeal Extraspinal Ependymoma.

Authors:  Kazuya Goto; Hiroko Fujii; Gen Honjo; Satoshi Kore-Eda
Journal:  Case Rep Dermatol       Date:  2021-06-14

9.  Cytokeratin positivity in myxopapillary ependymoma--a potential diagnostic pitfall.

Authors:  Sundus A Hussein; Monalisa Sur
Journal:  Diagn Pathol       Date:  2008-10-19       Impact factor: 2.644

10.  Ependymoma-like tumor with mesenchymal differentiation harboring C11orf95-NCOA1/2 or -RELA fusion: A hitherto unclassified tumor related to ependymoma.

Authors:  Ran Tomomasa; Yasuhito Arai; Reika Kawabata-Iwakawa; Kohei Fukuoka; Yoshiko Nakano; Natsuko Hama; Satoshi Nakata; Nozomi Suzuki; Yukitomo Ishi; Shinya Tanaka; Jun A Takahashi; Yoshiaki Yuba; Mitsutaka Shiota; Atsushi Natsume; Michihiro Kurimoto; Yoshiki Shiba; Mikiko Aoki; Kazuki Nabeshima; Toshiyuki Enomoto; Tooru Inoue; Junya Fujimura; Akihide Kondo; Takashi Yao; Naoki Okura; Takanori Hirose; Atsushi Sasaki; Masahiko Nishiyama; Koichi Ichimura; Tatsuhiro Shibata; Junko Hirato; Hideaki Yokoo; Sumihito Nobusawa
Journal:  Brain Pathol       Date:  2021-02-12       Impact factor: 6.508

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.