2000
DOI: 10.1001/archderm.136.4.543
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Can Dermatopathologists Reliably Make the Diagnosis of Mycosis Fungoides?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…2,3 Without ancillary techniques, histologic and cytologic interpretation of skin biopsy specimens is characterized by low accuracy and reliability. [11][12][13][14] Ancillary studies such as T-cell immunophenotyping and TCR gene rearrangement studies are often applied to facilitate the diagnosis. Immunohistochemical analysis typically evaluates the CD4/CD8 ratio and the loss of expression of the T-cell antigens CD2, CD3, CD5, and CD7 in epidermal or dermal lymphocytes as a finding associated with MF.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2,3 Without ancillary techniques, histologic and cytologic interpretation of skin biopsy specimens is characterized by low accuracy and reliability. [11][12][13][14] Ancillary studies such as T-cell immunophenotyping and TCR gene rearrangement studies are often applied to facilitate the diagnosis. Immunohistochemical analysis typically evaluates the CD4/CD8 ratio and the loss of expression of the T-cell antigens CD2, CD3, CD5, and CD7 in epidermal or dermal lymphocytes as a finding associated with MF.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In other words, when histopathologic features raised the possibility of MF but were insufficient for an unequivocal diagnosis, immunophenotyping generally did not help establish a more definitive diagnosis. MF is one of the most difficult diagnostic problems in dermatopathology 6,13,23,[33][34][35] and has resulted in a number of histologic algorithms and grading schemes 20,36,37 conveying to the clinician the degree of certainty with which the diagnosis was made.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1,14,18,22,23,33,55 Indeed, a 40% false-negative rate (MF misdiagnosed as a benign inflammatory condition) and a 44% false-positive rate (benign lesions misinterpreted as MF) have been estimated in the early diagnosis of the disease, clearly showing the need for better diagnostic criteria. 1,14,18,22,23,33,55 Indeed, a 40% false-negative rate (MF misdiagnosed as a benign inflammatory condition) and a 44% false-positive rate (benign lesions misinterpreted as MF) have been estimated in the early diagnosis of the disease, clearly showing the need for better diagnostic criteria.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%