Is a pseudocystic serpentine mass a sonographic indicator of breast lymphoma? Radiologic-histologic correlation of an unusual finding.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to A W Poniecka.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The presence of morphologically abnormal eosinophils in the bone marrow and/or peripheral blood has been rarely reported as a prominent feature in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). Specific chromosomal aberrations have been observed in such cases. We report a case of a 76-year-old man who presented with chronic, transfusion-dependent anemia. Peripheral blood smear analysis revealed anisocytes, mild leukopenia, and occasional hypersegmented eosinophils. A subsequent bone marrow biopsy and aspiration disclosed hypercellularity, and morphologic abnormalities within the megakaryocyte, erythroid, and myeloid series. The myeloid population was predominantly comprised of eosinophils with varying degrees of dyspoiesis. The constellation of hematologic findings were without a precise categorization according to the FAB classification of myelodysplastic syndromes. Subsequent cytogenetic techniques demonstrated a ring chromosome 7 in all 20 metaphases analyzed in cultured bone marrow cells. Eighty-five-percent of the analyzed cells showed a ring chromosome composed of both the long and short arms: r(7)(p22q36). In the remaining metaphases, the ring was composed of only the short arm: r(7)(p22q10). To our knowledge, these uncommon cytogenetic abnormalities have not been previously reported in association with MDS with morphologically atypical bone marrow or peripheral eosinophilia.
The histologic distinction between tricheopithelioma and basal cell carcinoma may be difficult in small biopsies. Immunohistochemical stains have been used to help make this distinction; however, published studies have generally been limited to a few antibodies. To this end we performed a comprehensive immunohistochemical analysis of 20 basal cell carcinomas and 10 tricheopitheliomas from our files, in search of a consistent pattern of reactivity to distinguish the neoplasms in biopsies. The antibodies used were: low molecular weight keratin (Cam 5.2), Cytokeratin 7, (CK7), Cytokeratin 20, (CK20), Carcino-embryonic antigen (CEA), CD30 (Ki-1), bcl-2, Ham 56, HPCA-I (CD34), and Ulex Europaeus type I. In our study, bcl-2 stained all but one basal cell carcinoma in a diffuse pattern, whereas all tricheopitheliomas showed staining of the outermost epithelial layer. No other stain proved to be an independent marker for either neoplasm and no consistent immunohistochemical profile for either neoplasm emerged. Thus, we conclude that bcl-2 may be of some value in distinguishing basal cell carcinoma from tricheopithelioma, limited by the quantitative nature of the difference in staining. Histologic criteria applied to H&E-stained sections remain the cornerstone of histologic diagnosis.
BACKGROUND: Granulomatous inflammation of the breast is an inflammatory process with multiple etiologies. It can accompany breast carcinoma or be idiopathic. It often presents clinically in a fashion mimicking carcinoma. Idiopathic granulomatous mastitis is strongly associated with lactation and is reported to occur in postpartum patients. This is the second fine needle aspiration (FNA) report of idiopathic granulomatous inflammation in the breast of a pregnant woman. CASE: A 27-year-old, 7-month-pregnant woman presented with a hard nodule in her right breast; on ultrasound examination it showed mixed echogenicity, suspicious for carcinoma. FNA showed granulomatous inflammation. The smears were highly cellular, with many clusters of and single epithelioid cells displaying moderate pleomorphism and prominent nucleoli in a background composed of neutrophils, plasma cells, lymphocytes and multinucleated cells. Core needle biopsy revealed a nonnecrotizing, granulomatous lesion. CONCLUSION: The diagnosis of granulomatous inflammation can be challenging, and the cytologic features can be difficult to separate from those of carcinoma. The relatively rare occurrence of this lesion and its cytologic features make it a potentially difficult diagnosis and diagnostic pitfall.