PubMed · 15760785
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Ramadass Satya, Ashok Muthukrishnan, Richard S Rosenthal, Buddhiwardhan C Ojha. Visual vignette.. https://doi.org/10.4158/ep.10.4.384
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
OBJECTIVE: The expression of claudins, the main tight junction proteins involved in cell adhesion and carcinogenesis, was studied in endometrioid (type I) and seropapillary (type II) endometrial adenocarcinoma. The characteristics and possible diagnostic potential of claudin expression pattern were investigated in the two cancer types having different prognosis. METHODS: Protein and mRNA expression of claudins was evaluated in 17 endometrioid carcinomas and 15 seropapillary adenocarcinomas by immunohistochemistry and real-time PCR in comparison with 38 cases of hyperplasia, normal proliferative and secretory endometrium samples. Further, protein expressions used in diagnostics (estrogen and progesterone receptors, p53, PCNA and beta-catenin) were also studied. RESULTS: In endometrioid carcinoma and hyperplasia low claudin 1 and high claudin 2 protein contents, whereas in seropapillary adenocarcinoma high claudin 1 and low claudin 2 levels were detected. Intense protein expression was noted for claudins 3, 4, 5, and 7, without significantly different patterns in carcinoma, hyperplasia, secretory, and proliferative endometrium. Real-time PCR results confirmed differences in claudin 1 but not claudin 2 mRNA expression, whereas some minor discrepancies were observed in comparison with immunohistochemistry patterns. CONCLUSION: The two types of endometrial adenocarcinomas were well distinguished by claudins 1 and 2 by immunohistochemistry, claudins 3, 4, and 7, however, did not prove useful in distinguishing the two entities. The similar claudin pattern seen in hyperplasia and endometrioid carcinoma and the differences regarding seropapillary adenocarcinoma support the dualistic model of endometrial carcinogenesis. The claudin pattern of the two tumor types might reflect a different cellular or pathogenetic pathway as well as a different cell adhesion behavior explaining the invasive properties.
Biliary cystic tumors, which are also called biliary cystadenoma and cystadenocarcinoma, are thought to be a heterogeneous disease entity, and some of them are known to show a luminal communication to the bile duct. In this study, we examined the clinicopathological features of nine cases of biliary cystic tumors with bile duct communication. They were composed of five males and four females with an average age of 67 years (52-84 years). They were multilocular (eight cases) or unilocular (one case), and all cases contained mucinous fluid. A direct luminal communication with the bile ducts was identified in five cases on preoperative or intraoperative cholangiographies. Biliary cystic tumors examined in this study were histologically adenoma (one case), adenocarcinoma in situ (six cases), and adenocarcinoma associated with microinvasive mucinous carcinoma (two cases). One case of adenocarcinoma in situ also had the adenoma component (adenocarcinoma in adenoma). Dysplastic mucinous epithelium proliferated in flat, micropapillary and papillary fashions within the intracystic spaces. Intraepithelial neoplasm was observed within non-dilated adjacent bile ducts, suggesting a direct luminal communication between the cystic tumors and the bile duct. Ovarian-like stroma was not observed in their walls in any cases. Immunohistochemically, seven cases expressed MUC1 or MUC2 in the neoplastic biliary epithelium. All cases except one were alive without any evidences of tumor recurrence after total excision (3-156 months after surgery). These clinicopathological features resembled those of intraductal papillary neoplasm of the bile duct, which had been reported as a biliary counterpart of pancreatic intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm. In conclusion, biliary cystic tumors with bile duct communication could be regarded as intraductal papillary neoplasm with a prominent cystic dilatation of the bile duct and mucin retention, rather than true biliary cystic neoplasms.