The Experts below are selected from a list of 24165 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Roaa M. Algowiez - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Primary paranasal sinus hyalinizing Clear Cell Carcinoma: a case report
Diagnostic Pathology, 2017Co-Authors: Batool M. Alali, Mohammed J. Alyousef, Ahmad Salah Kamel, Mohammad A. Al Hamad, Mohammad H. Al-bar, Roaa M. AlgowiezAbstract:Background Hyalinizing Clear Cell Carcinoma (HCCC) is a rare low-grade tumour of salivary glands that was first described as a distinct entity in 1994 by Milchgrub et al. EWSR1-ATF1 fusion was found to be specific for this tumour. The majority of the reported cases of HCCC arise from minor salivary glands within the oral cavity. Primary HCCC of the paranasal sinus is extremely uncommon. To our knowledge, only three cases have been reported in the English literature. Herein, we present a case of HCCC of the posterior ethmoid/maxillary sinus. Case presentation A 63-year-old lady who presented with a long history of epistaxis. CT scan revealed a destructive mass in the left ethmoid/posterior maxillary sinus extending to the nasal cavity. Surgical excision was done and microscopic evaluation showed a tumour composed mainly of nests of Clear epithelial Cells separated by fibroCellular and hyalinized septa with extensive bone destruction. The tumour Cells expressed CK5/6, EMA and p63 immunohistochemically but were negative for S100 protein, PAX-8, RCC and CK7. Sinonasal renal Cell–like adenoCarcinomas, myoepithelial Carcinoma and metastatic renal Cell Carcinoma were excluded by radiological and immunohistochemical studies. Fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis revealed an EWSR1 gene rearrangement. Postoperative radiation was administrated and the patient did not show recurrence or distant metastasis 4 months after the surgery. Conclusion Head and neck region have many tumours that demonstrate Clear Cell changes on histology. Thus, the differential diagnosis for HCCC is wide. Awareness of this rare entity and the possibility of it is arising in unusual location is necessary. EWSR1-AFT1 fusion, a consistent finding in HCCC, can be used to confirm the diagnosis.
-
primary paranasal sinus hyalinizing Clear Cell Carcinoma a case report
Diagnostic Pathology, 2017Co-Authors: Batool M. Alali, Mohammed J. Alyousef, Ahmad Salah Kamel, Mohammad A. Al Hamad, Mohammad H Albar, Roaa M. AlgowiezAbstract:Hyalinizing Clear Cell Carcinoma (HCCC) is a rare low-grade tumour of salivary glands that was first described as a distinct entity in 1994 by Milchgrub et al. EWSR1-ATF1 fusion was found to be specific for this tumour. The majority of the reported cases of HCCC arise from minor salivary glands within the oral cavity. Primary HCCC of the paranasal sinus is extremely uncommon. To our knowledge, only three cases have been reported in the English literature. Herein, we present a case of HCCC of the posterior ethmoid/maxillary sinus. A 63-year-old lady who presented with a long history of epistaxis. CT scan revealed a destructive mass in the left ethmoid/posterior maxillary sinus extending to the nasal cavity. Surgical excision was done and microscopic evaluation showed a tumour composed mainly of nests of Clear epithelial Cells separated by fibroCellular and hyalinized septa with extensive bone destruction. The tumour Cells expressed CK5/6, EMA and p63 immunohistochemically but were negative for S100 protein, PAX-8, RCC and CK7. Sinonasal renal Cell–like adenoCarcinomas, myoepithelial Carcinoma and metastatic renal Cell Carcinoma were excluded by radiological and immunohistochemical studies. Fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis revealed an EWSR1 gene rearrangement. Postoperative radiation was administrated and the patient did not show recurrence or distant metastasis 4 months after the surgery. Head and neck region have many tumours that demonstrate Clear Cell changes on histology. Thus, the differential diagnosis for HCCC is wide. Awareness of this rare entity and the possibility of it is arising in unusual location is necessary. EWSR1-AFT1 fusion, a consistent finding in HCCC, can be used to confirm the diagnosis.
David G Bostwick - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
immunohistochemical analysis of chromophobe renal Cell Carcinoma renal oncocytoma and Clear Cell Carcinoma an optimal and practical panel for differential diagnosis
Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, 2009Co-Authors: Junqi Qian, Xiaoge Zhou, Isabelle Meiers, Harpreet Singh, David G BostwickAbstract:● Context.—The separation of chromophobe renal Cell Carcinoma, oncocytoma, and Clear Cell renal Cell Carcinoma using light microscopy remains problematic in some cases. Objective.—To determine a practical immunohistochemical panel for the differential diagnosis of chromophobe Carcinoma. Design.—Vimentin, glutathione S-transferase (GST-), CD10, CD117, cytokeratin (CK) 7, and epithelial Cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) were investigated in 22 cases of chromophobe Carcinoma, 17 cases of oncocytoma, and 45 cases of Clear Cell Carcinoma. Results.—Vimentin and GST- expression were exclusively observed in Clear Cell Carcinoma. CD10 staining was more frequently detected in Clear Cell Carcinoma (91%) than in chromophobe Carcinoma (45%) and oncocytoma (29%). CD117 was strongly expressed in chromophobe Carcinoma (82%) and oncocytoma (100%), whereas none of the cases of Clear Cell Carcinomas were immunoreactive. Cytokeratin 7 was positive in 18 (86%) of 22 cases of chromophobe Carcinoma, whereas all oncocytomas were negative for CK7. EpCAM protein was expressed in all 22 cases of chromophobe Carcinoma in more than 90% of Cells, whereas all EpCAM-positive oncocytomas (5/17; 29%) displayed positivity in single Cells or small Cell clusters. Conclusions.—Using the combination of 3 markers (vimentin, GST-, and EpCAM), we achieved 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity for the differential diagnosis of chromophobe Carcinoma, oncocytoma, and Clear Cell Carcinoma. The pattern of ‘‘vimentin/GST-’’ effectively excluded Clear Cell Carcinoma, and homogeneous EpCAM expression confirmed the diagnosis of chromophobe Carcinoma rather than oncocytoma. CD117 and CK7 were also useful markers and could be used as second-line markers for the differential diagnosis, with high specificity (100%) and high sensitivity (90% and 86%, respectively). (Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2007;131:1290–1297)
-
immunohistochemical analysis of chromophobe renal Cell Carcinoma renal oncocytoma and Clear Cell Carcinoma an optimal and practical panel for differential diagnosis
Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, 2009Co-Authors: Junqi Qian, Xiaoge Zhou, Isabelle Meiers, Harpreet Singh, David G BostwickAbstract:● Context.—The separation of chromophobe renal Cell Carcinoma, oncocytoma, and Clear Cell renal Cell Carcinoma using light microscopy remains problematic in some cases. Objective.—To determine a practical immunohistochemical panel for the differential diagnosis of chromophobe Carcinoma. Design.—Vimentin, glutathione S-transferase (GST-), CD10, CD117, cytokeratin (CK) 7, and epithelial Cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) were investigated in 22 cases of chromophobe Carcinoma, 17 cases of oncocytoma, and 45 cases of Clear Cell Carcinoma. Results.—Vimentin and GST- expression were exclusively observed in Clear Cell Carcinoma. CD10 staining was more frequently detected in Clear Cell Carcinoma (91%) than in chromophobe Carcinoma (45%) and oncocytoma (29%). CD117 was strongly expressed in chromophobe Carcinoma (82%) and oncocytoma (100%), whereas none of the cases of Clear Cell Carcinomas were immunoreactive. Cytokeratin 7 was positive in 18 (86%) of 22 cases of chromophobe Carcinoma, whereas all oncocytomas were negative for CK7. EpCAM protein was expressed in all 22 cases of chromophobe Carcinoma in more than 90% of Cells, whereas all EpCAM-positive oncocytomas (5/17; 29%) displayed positivity in single Cells or small Cell clusters. Conclusions.—Using the combination of 3 markers (vimentin, GST-, and EpCAM), we achieved 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity for the differential diagnosis of chromophobe Carcinoma, oncocytoma, and Clear Cell Carcinoma. The pattern of ‘‘vimentin/GST-’’ effectively excluded Clear Cell Carcinoma, and homogeneous EpCAM expression confirmed the diagnosis of chromophobe Carcinoma rather than oncocytoma. CD117 and CK7 were also useful markers and could be used as second-line markers for the differential diagnosis, with high specificity (100%) and high sensitivity (90% and 86%, respectively). (Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2007;131:1290–1297)
Ilan Weinreb - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
hyalinizing Clear Cell Carcinoma of salivary gland a review and update
Head and Neck Pathology, 2013Co-Authors: Ilan WeinrebAbstract:Hyalinizing Clear Cell Carcinoma (HCCC) is a rare minor salivary gland tumor made up of Clear Cells and forming cords and nests in a hyalinized stroma. The overall outcome is exCellent with only occasional metastatic spread. HCCC has a wide differential diagnosis including other Clear Cell-containing tumors, such as epithelial-myoepithelial Carcinoma, mucoepidermoid Carcinoma, and myoepithelial Carcinoma. HCCC is currently classified as a “Clear Cell adenoCarcinoma” by the AFIP and as “Clear Cell Carcinoma, not otherwise specified (NOS)” by the World Health Organization (WHO). It is considered by the WHO to be a diagnosis of exclusion. Since the original description in 1994, there have been few new insights into HCCC, until recently. Dardick re-examined the features of HCCC, including the original electron microscopic images, and concluded that HCCC is a squamous lesion, at odds with the above nomenclature. Bilodeau et al. recently showed that this tumor essentially cannot be separated reliably from Clear Cell odontogenic Carcinoma (CCOC) except by location. Antonescu et al. recently identified a consistent EWSR1-ATF1 fusion in HCCC. Bilodeau et al. subsequently argued a link between these two entities, with evidence of similar EWSR1 and ATF1 rearrangements in CCOC. This molecular signature is not present in other Clear Cell mimics. Cases with recurrence, metastasis, high-grade features and other alternative morphologies or presentations have also been seen and proven by molecular analysis to be HCCC. In the molecular era, HCCC can no longer be seen as a diagnosis of exclusion. It is neither an adenoCarcinoma nor a “not otherwise specified” tumor, as the AFIP and WHO currently classify it. This review provides an in-depth look at the current state of knowledge of HCCC from morphology to molecular features. New developments and personal insights are provided that help identify and properly classify this lesion.
-
What the EWSR1-ATF1 Fusion has Taught Us About Hyalinizing Clear Cell Carcinoma
Head and Neck Pathology, 2013Co-Authors: Jeff Tanguay, Ilan WeinrebAbstract:Hyalinizing Clear Cell Carcinoma (HCCC) is a unique low-grade tumor composed of cords and nests of Clear Cells in a hyalinized stroma that was first reported by Milchgrub et al. It was recognized as a separate entity from Clear Cell variants of epithelial-myoepithelial Carcinoma, myoepithelial Carcinoma and mucoepidermoid Carcinoma. HCCC is included in a long list of Clear Cell-containing tumors of salivary gland, as well as odontogenic tumors and metastases (renal Cell Carcinoma). Up until now, it has been considered a diagnosis of exclusion, despite its very distinctive appearance, and labeled as “not otherwise specified” by the World Health Organization. The emergence of molecular data in salivary gland tumors, including HCCC now allow for a more rigorous appraisal of its spectrum. The EWSR1 - ATF1 fusion has proven the concept of a “mucinous HCCC” and removes mucin as an exclusion criterion for this tumor. It has also proven a genetic link between Clear Cell odontogenic Carcinoma and HCCC. Molecularly-proven cases have also highlighted variant morphologies and shown that cases with overt squamous differentiation are true HCCC. This gives further weight to the classification of this tumor as squamous or adenosquamous in differentiation and as a specific entity rather than an “NOS” tumor.
Batool M. Alali - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Primary paranasal sinus hyalinizing Clear Cell Carcinoma: a case report
Diagnostic Pathology, 2017Co-Authors: Batool M. Alali, Mohammed J. Alyousef, Ahmad Salah Kamel, Mohammad A. Al Hamad, Mohammad H. Al-bar, Roaa M. AlgowiezAbstract:Background Hyalinizing Clear Cell Carcinoma (HCCC) is a rare low-grade tumour of salivary glands that was first described as a distinct entity in 1994 by Milchgrub et al. EWSR1-ATF1 fusion was found to be specific for this tumour. The majority of the reported cases of HCCC arise from minor salivary glands within the oral cavity. Primary HCCC of the paranasal sinus is extremely uncommon. To our knowledge, only three cases have been reported in the English literature. Herein, we present a case of HCCC of the posterior ethmoid/maxillary sinus. Case presentation A 63-year-old lady who presented with a long history of epistaxis. CT scan revealed a destructive mass in the left ethmoid/posterior maxillary sinus extending to the nasal cavity. Surgical excision was done and microscopic evaluation showed a tumour composed mainly of nests of Clear epithelial Cells separated by fibroCellular and hyalinized septa with extensive bone destruction. The tumour Cells expressed CK5/6, EMA and p63 immunohistochemically but were negative for S100 protein, PAX-8, RCC and CK7. Sinonasal renal Cell–like adenoCarcinomas, myoepithelial Carcinoma and metastatic renal Cell Carcinoma were excluded by radiological and immunohistochemical studies. Fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis revealed an EWSR1 gene rearrangement. Postoperative radiation was administrated and the patient did not show recurrence or distant metastasis 4 months after the surgery. Conclusion Head and neck region have many tumours that demonstrate Clear Cell changes on histology. Thus, the differential diagnosis for HCCC is wide. Awareness of this rare entity and the possibility of it is arising in unusual location is necessary. EWSR1-AFT1 fusion, a consistent finding in HCCC, can be used to confirm the diagnosis.
-
primary paranasal sinus hyalinizing Clear Cell Carcinoma a case report
Diagnostic Pathology, 2017Co-Authors: Batool M. Alali, Mohammed J. Alyousef, Ahmad Salah Kamel, Mohammad A. Al Hamad, Mohammad H Albar, Roaa M. AlgowiezAbstract:Hyalinizing Clear Cell Carcinoma (HCCC) is a rare low-grade tumour of salivary glands that was first described as a distinct entity in 1994 by Milchgrub et al. EWSR1-ATF1 fusion was found to be specific for this tumour. The majority of the reported cases of HCCC arise from minor salivary glands within the oral cavity. Primary HCCC of the paranasal sinus is extremely uncommon. To our knowledge, only three cases have been reported in the English literature. Herein, we present a case of HCCC of the posterior ethmoid/maxillary sinus. A 63-year-old lady who presented with a long history of epistaxis. CT scan revealed a destructive mass in the left ethmoid/posterior maxillary sinus extending to the nasal cavity. Surgical excision was done and microscopic evaluation showed a tumour composed mainly of nests of Clear epithelial Cells separated by fibroCellular and hyalinized septa with extensive bone destruction. The tumour Cells expressed CK5/6, EMA and p63 immunohistochemically but were negative for S100 protein, PAX-8, RCC and CK7. Sinonasal renal Cell–like adenoCarcinomas, myoepithelial Carcinoma and metastatic renal Cell Carcinoma were excluded by radiological and immunohistochemical studies. Fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis revealed an EWSR1 gene rearrangement. Postoperative radiation was administrated and the patient did not show recurrence or distant metastasis 4 months after the surgery. Head and neck region have many tumours that demonstrate Clear Cell changes on histology. Thus, the differential diagnosis for HCCC is wide. Awareness of this rare entity and the possibility of it is arising in unusual location is necessary. EWSR1-AFT1 fusion, a consistent finding in HCCC, can be used to confirm the diagnosis.
Junqi Qian - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
immunohistochemical analysis of chromophobe renal Cell Carcinoma renal oncocytoma and Clear Cell Carcinoma an optimal and practical panel for differential diagnosis
Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, 2009Co-Authors: Junqi Qian, Xiaoge Zhou, Isabelle Meiers, Harpreet Singh, David G BostwickAbstract:● Context.—The separation of chromophobe renal Cell Carcinoma, oncocytoma, and Clear Cell renal Cell Carcinoma using light microscopy remains problematic in some cases. Objective.—To determine a practical immunohistochemical panel for the differential diagnosis of chromophobe Carcinoma. Design.—Vimentin, glutathione S-transferase (GST-), CD10, CD117, cytokeratin (CK) 7, and epithelial Cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) were investigated in 22 cases of chromophobe Carcinoma, 17 cases of oncocytoma, and 45 cases of Clear Cell Carcinoma. Results.—Vimentin and GST- expression were exclusively observed in Clear Cell Carcinoma. CD10 staining was more frequently detected in Clear Cell Carcinoma (91%) than in chromophobe Carcinoma (45%) and oncocytoma (29%). CD117 was strongly expressed in chromophobe Carcinoma (82%) and oncocytoma (100%), whereas none of the cases of Clear Cell Carcinomas were immunoreactive. Cytokeratin 7 was positive in 18 (86%) of 22 cases of chromophobe Carcinoma, whereas all oncocytomas were negative for CK7. EpCAM protein was expressed in all 22 cases of chromophobe Carcinoma in more than 90% of Cells, whereas all EpCAM-positive oncocytomas (5/17; 29%) displayed positivity in single Cells or small Cell clusters. Conclusions.—Using the combination of 3 markers (vimentin, GST-, and EpCAM), we achieved 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity for the differential diagnosis of chromophobe Carcinoma, oncocytoma, and Clear Cell Carcinoma. The pattern of ‘‘vimentin/GST-’’ effectively excluded Clear Cell Carcinoma, and homogeneous EpCAM expression confirmed the diagnosis of chromophobe Carcinoma rather than oncocytoma. CD117 and CK7 were also useful markers and could be used as second-line markers for the differential diagnosis, with high specificity (100%) and high sensitivity (90% and 86%, respectively). (Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2007;131:1290–1297)
-
immunohistochemical analysis of chromophobe renal Cell Carcinoma renal oncocytoma and Clear Cell Carcinoma an optimal and practical panel for differential diagnosis
Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, 2009Co-Authors: Junqi Qian, Xiaoge Zhou, Isabelle Meiers, Harpreet Singh, David G BostwickAbstract:● Context.—The separation of chromophobe renal Cell Carcinoma, oncocytoma, and Clear Cell renal Cell Carcinoma using light microscopy remains problematic in some cases. Objective.—To determine a practical immunohistochemical panel for the differential diagnosis of chromophobe Carcinoma. Design.—Vimentin, glutathione S-transferase (GST-), CD10, CD117, cytokeratin (CK) 7, and epithelial Cell adhesion molecule (EpCAM) were investigated in 22 cases of chromophobe Carcinoma, 17 cases of oncocytoma, and 45 cases of Clear Cell Carcinoma. Results.—Vimentin and GST- expression were exclusively observed in Clear Cell Carcinoma. CD10 staining was more frequently detected in Clear Cell Carcinoma (91%) than in chromophobe Carcinoma (45%) and oncocytoma (29%). CD117 was strongly expressed in chromophobe Carcinoma (82%) and oncocytoma (100%), whereas none of the cases of Clear Cell Carcinomas were immunoreactive. Cytokeratin 7 was positive in 18 (86%) of 22 cases of chromophobe Carcinoma, whereas all oncocytomas were negative for CK7. EpCAM protein was expressed in all 22 cases of chromophobe Carcinoma in more than 90% of Cells, whereas all EpCAM-positive oncocytomas (5/17; 29%) displayed positivity in single Cells or small Cell clusters. Conclusions.—Using the combination of 3 markers (vimentin, GST-, and EpCAM), we achieved 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity for the differential diagnosis of chromophobe Carcinoma, oncocytoma, and Clear Cell Carcinoma. The pattern of ‘‘vimentin/GST-’’ effectively excluded Clear Cell Carcinoma, and homogeneous EpCAM expression confirmed the diagnosis of chromophobe Carcinoma rather than oncocytoma. CD117 and CK7 were also useful markers and could be used as second-line markers for the differential diagnosis, with high specificity (100%) and high sensitivity (90% and 86%, respectively). (Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2007;131:1290–1297)