Microphthalmia transcription factor immunohistochemistry: A useful diagnostic marker in the diagnosis and detection of cutaneous melanoma, sentinel lymph node metastases, and extracutaneous melanocytic neoplasms

O’Reilly, Fiona; Brat, Daniel J.; McAlpine, Barbara E.; Grossniklaus, Hans E.; Folpe, Andrew L.; Arbiser, Jack L.

doi:10.1067/mjd.2001.117526

Cited by 32 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…MITF-1, a nuclear melanocytic marker, is highly sensitive and specific for melanoma, with reported sensitivity ranging from 81% to 100% and a specificity ranging from 88% to 100%. 5,8,10,[14][15][16][17] Also mast cells, histiocytes, fibroblasts, lymphocytes, osteoclasts, Schwann cells, and smooth muscle cells have all been described as being potentially immunoreactive with MITF-1. 10 In our study, however, because all lesions were restricted to the epidermis, this eliminated the potential for confusing the staining pattern of other cell types.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…9 As the diagnostic and treatment implications for these lesions are different, immunohistochemical markers are often employed to help assess the density of melanocytes and to differentiate melanoma from its mimics, which on small biopsies may be difficult to discern especially in cases exhibiting atypical melanocytic hyperplasia. 5,8,9 Several immunohistochemical studies, such as S100p, HMB-45, or MART-1, are routinely used to help differentiate melanocytes from adjacent keratinocytes. Nevertheless, the most commonly used adjunct immunohistochemical stain for the diagnosis of melanoma in situ probably is MART-1.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Diagnostic Utility and Comparative Immunohistochemical Analysis of MITF-1 and SOX10 to Distinguish Melanoma In Situ and Actinic Keratosis

Buonaccorsi

Prieto

Torres‐Cabala

et al. 2014

The American Journal of Dermatopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The histologic assessment of intraepidermal melanocytic proliferations involving sun-damaged skin may be challenging in scant biopsy material. Melanoma in situ may occasionally be confused with intraepidermal melanocytic hyperplasia on sun-damaged skin; thus, dermatopathologists may use immunohistochemical studies to help distinguish these entities. Historically, melanoma antigen recognized by T-cells 1 (MART-1) has been regarded as a valuable stain to confirm intraepidermal melanocytes; however, MART-1 may overestimate the number of melanocytes because it labels the melanoma dendrites and might also label pigmented keratinocytes, including structures mimicking junctional melanocytic nests in the setting of a lichenoid infiltrate. A total of 70 cases were retrospectively chosen, including 50 cases of melanoma in situ and 20 cases of actinic keratoses. SOX10 and microphthalmia transcription factor 1 (MITF-1) were performed in all cases. In all cases, the number of cells within epidermis that were identified as melanocytes by immunohistochemistry was compared with the number of melanocytes observed by morphology on hematoxylin and eosin sections. All cases of melanoma in situ showed expression of SOX10; however, the proportion of atypical melanocytes showing strong nuclear positivity was variable and did not approach that seen in MITF-1. There was no expression of either MITF-1 or SOX10 in adjacent pigmented keratinocytes in the cases of actinic keratoses. Both MITF-1 and SOX10 can be used to differentiate melanoma in situ from actinic keratosis with melanocytic hyperplasia; however, MITF-1 exhibits slight superior sensitivity and seems to be a more effective immunostain than SOX10 for the identification and quantification of melanocytes in the setting of melanoma in situ, especially in cases where there is limited tissue.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic Utility and Comparative Immunohistochemical Analysis of MITF-1 and SOX10 to Distinguish Melanoma In Situ and Actinic Keratosis

Buonaccorsi

Prieto

Torres‐Cabala

et al. 2014

The American Journal of Dermatopathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…50 These findings contradict our observations and those of others, which may be attributed to the difference in the duration of incubation with primary antibody, overnight vs 1 hour. 43,46,47,50 Similar to HMB-45, both Melan-A and Mitf stain angiomyolipomas positively. 29,[51][52][53] One diagnostic challenge is to differentiate spindle cell and desmoplastic melanomas from other spindle cell lesions.…”

Section: ❚Table 2❚ Comparison Of the Sensitivity Specificity Positimentioning

confidence: 89%

“…44,45 We and others have demonstrated that monoclonal antibody to Mitf (D5) was a sensitive marker for epithelioid melanomas; 88% to 100% of melanomas were positive for the anti-Mitf. 43,46,47 It also is a specific marker for epithelioid melanoma. King et al 47 and Miettinen et al 43 found no significant immunoreactivity in 81 and 192 nonmelanocytic neoplasms, respectively, when immunostained with anti-Mitf.…”

Section: ❚Table 2❚ Comparison Of the Sensitivity Specificity Positimentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Five Antibodies as Markers in the Diagnosis of Melanoma in Cytologic Preparations

Sheffield

Yee

Dorvault³

et al. 2002

Am J Clin Pathol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We determined the sensitivity and specificity of 3 novel antibodies (microphthalmia transcription factor [Mitf], Melan-A, and tyrosinase) as markers for melanoma in cytologic preparations and compared the results with those of commonly used markers (S-100 protein [S-100] and HMB-45). We stained 72 cell blocks from 40 patients with melanoma and 32 with nonmelanocytic malignant neoplasms with antibodies against S-100, HMB-45, Mitf, Melan-A, and tyrosinase. Histologic correlation was available in more than 95% of cases. Nuclear stainingfor Mitf and cytoplasmic stainingfor S-100, HMB-45, Melan-A, and tyrosinase in more than 10% of tumor cells was considered positive. All 3 novel markers demonstrated sensitivity superior to S-100 and HMB-45. HMB-45, Melan-A, and Mitf demonstrated specificities of 97%. S-100 protein and tyrosinase were less specific. Sensitivity and specificity for the combination Mitf+/Melan-A+ were 95% and 100%, respectively, whereas they were 80% and 100%, respectively, for S-100+/HMB-45+. Mitf Melan-A, and tyrosinase are sensitive markersfor epithelioid melanoma. Mitf and Melan-A seem more specific than S-100 and tyrosinase. An antibody panel consisting of Mitf and Melan-A is superior to a panel of S-100 and HMB-45 in the diagnosis of melanoma in cytologic specimens.

show abstract

“…1 Recent studies have demonstrated the antibody generated against human Mitf is reactive with metastatic malignant melanoma and appears to be a sensitive marker for melanocytes as well as melanocytic neoplasms. [2][3][4][5][6] In the diagnostic evaluation of a lesion suspected to be a cellular neurothekeoma, we observed reactivity with Mitf. This led us to review the immunohistochemical profile of all the cellular neurothekeomas in our laboratory with regard to staining with Mitf, S-100 and NKI/C3.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Microphthalmia transcription factor and NKI/C3 expression in cellular neurothekeoma

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While the usual or myxoid-type neurothekeoma has been reasonably well established as being a tumor of neural origin, the cellular neurothekeoma remains in disputed histogenesis. We studied a series of 11 cellular neurothekeomas using paraffin immunoperoxidase staining with microphthalmia transcription factor (Mitf), NKI/C3, and S-100. The majority of the tumors in our series stained with NKI/C3 (9/11) and Mitf (9/11). All failed to stain with S-100. Furthermore, we divided our series of cellular neurothekeomas according to cytomorphology; tumors demonstrating predominantly spindled morphology, predominantly epithelioid morphology, and mixed spindle and epithelioid morphology. The two tumors that failed to stain with NKI/C3 both demonstrated predominantly spindled morphology. One of the tumors that failed to stain with Mitf showed exclusive spindled morphology, while the other showed mixed morphology (spindle and epithelioid). Two of the tumors, which stained strongly with Mitf, however, showed exclusive epithelioid morphology. This current study furthers the concept that cellular neurothekeoma is a tumor of neuroectodermal origin, and further suggests that it may express some component of melanocytic differentiation.

show abstract

Microphthalmia transcription factor immunohistochemistry: A useful diagnostic marker in the diagnosis and detection of cutaneous melanoma, sentinel lymph node metastases, and extracutaneous melanocytic neoplasms

Cited by 32 publications

References 19 publications

Diagnostic Utility and Comparative Immunohistochemical Analysis of MITF-1 and SOX10 to Distinguish Melanoma In Situ and Actinic Keratosis

Diagnostic Utility and Comparative Immunohistochemical Analysis of MITF-1 and SOX10 to Distinguish Melanoma In Situ and Actinic Keratosis

Comparison of Five Antibodies as Markers in the Diagnosis of Melanoma in Cytologic Preparations

Microphthalmia transcription factor and NKI/C3 expression in cellular neurothekeoma

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About