Literature DB >> 22731835

Application of fluorescence in situ hybridization as a diagnostic tool in melanocytic lesions, using paraffin wax-embedded tissues and imprint-cytology specimens.

A Abásolo1, M T Vargas, J J Ríos-Martín, I Trigo, A Arjona, R González-Cámpora.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Accurate histopathological diagnosis of certain melanocytic skin lesions as benign or malignant can be notoriously difficult. Recently, four-colour fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) has emerged as an important tool for classifying these lesions. AIM: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of a melanoma FISH probe kit for accurate diagnosis of melanocytic tumours, and to validate its use with imprint-cytology specimens from the cut surface of tumours.
METHODS: In total, 50 melanocytic skin lesions (31 malignant melanomas, 10 benign melanocytic naevi, and 9 histologically challenging benign melanocytic skin lesions) were evaluated. The samples comprise 47 tissue specimens embedded in paraffin wax, and three imprint-cytology specimens from the cut surface of melanomas. FISH was performed using four locus-specific identifier probes [Ras responsive element binding protein (RREB)1, myeloblastosis viral oncogene homologue (MYB), cyclin (CCN)D1 and centromere of chromosome (CEP)6], and results were compared with the clinical long-term follow-up and histopathological diagnosis data.
RESULTS: The melanoma FISH probe distinguished between naevi and melanomas with a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 94.1%. The most sensitive criterion was a gain in 6p25 (RREB1), seen in 100% of cases, followed by CEP6-related MYB loss (48.1%), CCND1 gain (37%) and MYB gain (22.2%). More than three-quarters (77.8%) of melanomas were positive for two or more criteria. Positive FISH results were also obtained for the imprint-cytology specimens.
CONCLUSIONS: FISH is a valuable diagnostic tool for differentiating between benign and malignant melanocytic lesions, providing a high degree of sensitivity and specificity. The probes displayed exceptional discriminative capacity in difficult or ambiguous lesions. To our knowledge, his is the first reported use of imprint-cytology specimens for FISH diagnosis. © The Author(s). CED
© 2012 British Association of Dermatologists.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22731835     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2230.2012.04416.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Exp Dermatol        ISSN: 0307-6938            Impact factor:   3.470


  5 in total

Review 1.  Through the looking glass and what you find there: making sense of comparative genomic hybridization and fluorescence in situ hybridization for melanoma diagnosis.

Authors:  Jayson Miedema; Aleodor A Andea
Journal:  Mod Pathol       Date:  2020-02-17       Impact factor: 7.842

2.  The role of CCND1 alterations during the progression of cutaneous malignant melanoma.

Authors:  Laura Vízkeleti; Szilvia Ecsedi; Zsuzsa Rákosy; Adrienn Orosz; Viktória Lázár; Gabriella Emri; Viktória Koroknai; Tímea Kiss; Róza Ádány; Margit Balázs
Journal:  Tumour Biol       Date:  2012-09-23

3.  Diagnostic role of chromosomal instability in melanoma.

Authors:  Nitika Dabas; Diana M Byrnes; Ashley M Rosa; Mark S Eller; James M Grichnik
Journal:  J Skin Cancer       Date:  2012-10-18

4.  Four-color fluorescence in-situ hybridization is useful to assist to distinguish early stage acral and cutaneous melanomas from dysplastic junctional or compound nevus.

Authors:  Yumei Lai; Yan Wu; Ruping Liu; Aiping Lu; Lixin Zhou; Lin Jia; Xinting Diao; Zhongwu Li
Journal:  Diagn Pathol       Date:  2020-05-11       Impact factor: 2.644

Review 5.  Transcription Factor RREB1: from Target Genes towards Biological Functions.

Authors:  Ya-Nan Deng; Zijing Xia; Peng Zhang; Samina Ejaz; Shufang Liang
Journal:  Int J Biol Sci       Date:  2020-02-21       Impact factor: 6.580

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.