Search

The distinction of malignant mesothelioma from non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) usually requires immunohistochemistry, but some broad-spectrum carcinoma markers stain mesotheliomas, and it remains unclear which broad-spectrum markers are most valuable for distinguishing these malignancies. Here, we directly compared the sensitivity and specificity of three broad-spectrum carcinoma markers, claudin-4, Ber-EP4, and MOC-31, for distinguishing NSCLC from mesothelioma. Immunohistochemistry was performed on tissue microarrays containing 68 epithelioid mesotheliomas, 31 sarcomatoid mesotheliomas, and 147 non-small-cell lung cancers (53 adenocarcinomas, 60 squamous cell carcinomas, 13 large-cell carcinomas, and 21 sarcomatoid carcinomas). For adenocarcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and large-cell carcinoma, claudin-4 staining was present in 103 of 126 cases (82%), MOC-31 staining was present in 112 of 126 cases (89%), and Ber-EP4 staining was present in 113 of 126 cases (90%); these values were not statistically different. Claudin-4 stained 0 of 68 (0%), MOC-31 stained 22 of 68 (32%), and Ber-EP4 stained 24 of 68 (35%) epithelioid mesotheliomas; thus, the specificities for NSCLC versus epithelioid mesothelioma were 100%, 68%, and 65%, respectively. Claudin-4 staining was present in 7 of 21 (33%), MOC-31 staining was present in 8 of 21 (38%), and Ber-EP4 staining was present in 5 of 21 (24%) sarcomatoid carcinomas. All three markers were negative in 12 of 21 (57%) sarcomatoid carcinomas. Sarcomatoid mesotheliomas were not stained with any of these markers. We conclude that claudin-4 has considerably greater specificity and comparable sensitivity to MOC-31 and Ber-EP4 for distinguishing NSCLC from epithelioid malignant mesothelioma. The use of all three markers may be necessary for sarcomatoid neoplasms, given their limited sensitivity., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Considering the potential of p16 as a marker for diagnosis, prognosis and therapeutic response, the aim of this study was to assess its presence, via immunocytochemistry, in metastatic carcinoma of different primary sites and histological types obtained from effusions and peritoneal washings. A total of 118 samples including 85 of metastatic carcinoma and 33 samples of benign effusion/peritoneal washing were prepared by the plasma/thromboplastin method. Immunocytochemistry reactions were performed on cell block sections using antibodies against p16, claudin-4, MOC-31, calretinin, HBME and CD68., Results: P16 overexpression was observed in 88.23% of all carcinoma samples. All cervix adenocarcinoma samples showed p16 overexpression. Overexpression in adenocarcinomas of ovary, lung and breast was observed in 93.75, 93.10 and 75% of the samples, respectively. Overexpression was observed in all different histological types analyzed: small cell carcinoma (lung), squamous cell carcinoma (cervical) and urothelial carcinoma (bladder). The specificity of p16 for carcinoma detection was of 96.96%., Conclusion: Overexpression of p16 was observed in most metastatic carcinoma, from different primary sites and histological types, obtained from effusions and peritoneal washings. Due to its high frequency of overexpression in metastatic carcinoma, p16 may play a possible role in tumor progression and it may be considered as a complementary diagnostic marker depending on histological type and primary site of carcinoma.

Aims: Dedifferentiated endometrial carcinomas (DDECs)/undifferentiated endometrial carcinomas (UECs) are aggressive endometrial cancers with frequent genomic inactivation of core components of switch/sucrose non-fermentable (SWI/SNF) complex proteins. Claudin-4, an epithelial intercellular tight junction protein, was recently found to be expressed in SWI/SNF-deficient undifferentiated carcinomas but not in SWI/SNF-deficient sarcomas. The aim of this study was to examine claudin-4 expression in UECs/DDECs and other high-grade uterine carcinomas., Methods and Results: We examined claudin-4 expression by immunohistochemistry (clone 3E2C1) on tissue microarrays that contained 44 UECs/DDECs (24 SWI/SNF-deficient), 50 carcinosarcomas, 164 grade 3 endometrioid carcinomas, 57 serous carcinomas, and 20 clear cell carcinomas. Tumours with <5% claudin-4 expression were considered to be negative. Nearly all SWI/SNF-deficient, and most SWI/SNF-proficient, UECs/DDECs showed a complete absence of claudin-4 expression in the undifferentiated component, whereas the differentiated component in DDECs showed consistent and diffuse claudin-4 expression. Only one SWI/SNF-deficient DDEC showed focal expression of claudin-4 in the undifferentiated component, as compared with diffuse expression in the corresponding differentiated component. Claudin-4 expression was consistently absent in the sarcomatous component of carcinosarcoma, and it was absent in 24% of grade 3 endometrioid carcinomas and serous carcinomas., Conclusion: Claudin-4 expression can be absent or very focal in a subset of high-grade endometrial carcinomas, and is almost always absent in the undifferentiated components of SWI/SNF-deficient UECs/DDECs, despite the apparent epithelial origin in the case of DDECs. Therefore, claudin-4 expression cannot be used to infer mesenchymal or epithelial tumour origin in the endometrium. The consistent loss or down-regulation of claudin-4, a tight junction protein, in SWI/SNF-deficient UECs/DDECs further supports the undifferentiated nature of these tumours., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objectives: The diagnosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) can be challenging to distinguish tumor cells from benign epithelium (BE). The aim of the present study was to set a minimal antibody panel to differentiate PDAC from contaminated BE in EUS-FNA specimens., Methods: Immunohistochemistry using claudin 4, EZH2, Ki-67, maspin, p53, and S100P was performed on tissue microarray sections containing 53 PDACs and 33 BE as well as cell blocks of EUS-FNA including 53 PDACs and 22 BE. The positive rate was scored as 0 to 4+. The receiver operating characteristic curve was applied to determine a cutoff point, and the Classification And Regression Trees method was used to obtain a classification tree of the best panel., Results: The cutoff point was 1+ for claudin 4, EZH2, Ki-67, p53, and S100P and 2+ for maspin. All BE scored 0 for p53. The classification tree revealed using p53, S100P, and claudin 4 was the most powerful. The sensitivity and specificity of the tree were 96.2% and 100% in tissue microarrays and 100% and 95.5% in EUS-FNA, respectively., Conclusions: The classification tree using p53, S100P, and claudin 4 seems to successfully distinguish PDAC from the accompanying BE.

Objective: Tight junction proteins have recently been reported to be useful for distinguishing between neoplastic and non-neoplastic tissues. In this study, we evaluated the expression and localization of tight junction transmembrane proteins in human cervical adenocarcinoma and adenocarcinoma in situ (AIS), and we determined whether their expression patterns could distinguish cervical adenocarcinoma from non-neoplastic cervical glands., Methods: Fifty-five patients with cervical adenocarcinoma or AIS were included in this study. Surgical specimens were immunohistochemically stained for claudin (CLDN) -1, -4, -7, occludin, and JAM-A., Results: Significantly higher expression levels of CLDNs and JAM-A were found in cervical AIS and adenocarcinoma than in non-neoplastic glands. In cervical AIS and adenocarcinoma, localization of CLDN1 and JAM-A was extended throughout the whole cell membranes, whereas they were predominantly expressed at the most apical cell-cell junction in non-neoplastic glands. ROC curve analysis revealed that immunoreactivities of CLDN-1 or JAM-A successfully distinguished neoplasms from non-neoplastic cervical glands with high specificity (CLDN-1, 79.1%; JAM-A, 79.1%) and high sensitivity (CLDN-1, 84.1%; JAM-A, 95.5%)., Conclusions: As expected, there were immunohistochemical differences between cervical adenocarcinoma and non-neoplastic cervical glands by using antibodies against tight junction transmembrane proteins. These results suggest that CLDN-1 and JAM-A are potential biomarkers for cervical adenocarcinoma.

The intercellular bridges are essential structures in maintaining the histologic organization of the epithelium, while providing a very efficient way to exchange molecules between cells and transduction of the cell-to-cell and matrix-to-cell signals. Derangement in those important structures' physical integrity and/or function, which can be assessed by the presence or absence of several intercellular bridge proteins including claudin-4, E-cadherin, and β-catenin, was found to be related to several phenomena in the path to the neoplastic transformation. However, these proteins have not been studied in the wide variety of the skin neoplasms, in detail. Herein, we immunohistochemically assessed the expression patterns of these 3 intercellular bridge proteins on a total of 86 epidermal and eccrine adnexal tumors including basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, poroma, spiradenoma, syringoma, and hidradenoma. We observed a selective and distinct claudin-4 expression in the ductal-type cells of all cases of spiradenomas. Similarly, in the poromas, syringomas, and hidradenomas, claudin-4 was only positive in the luminal cells of microcystic structures, although not as conspicuous as in the spiradenomas. On the other hand, E-cadherin and β-catenin were positive in almost all types of the tumors, in a way which was not contributory to differentiate from each other. In conclusion, we think that claudin-4 can be helpful at least in making a reliable differential diagnosis of spiradenoma when overlapping morphologic features do not allow to further subclassification in the overwhelming variety of the adnexal tumors., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Tight junction (TJ) proteins in the cells organize paracellular permeability, and they have a critical role in apical cell-to-cell adhesion and epithelial polarity. In our study, the expression patterns of claudins 1, 4, and 7 and their relationship with prognosis were determined in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma., Methods: Claudins 1, 4, and 7 were stained immunohistochemically in 18 biopsy samples of nasopharyngeal carcinomas that included non-neoplastic surface epithelium and dysplastic epithelium in addition to the tumor tissue. The files of these patients were scanned and the stage of disease and treatment received were obtained along with demographic data such as age and gender., Results: Overexpression of claudins 1, 4, and 7 in non-neoplastic surface epithelium was found in 14 (77.7%), 16 (88.8%), and 10 (55.5%) cases respectively; in dysplastic surface epithelium overexpression was found in 8 (44.4%), 13 (72.2%), and 4 (22.2%) cases, respectively; and in invasive tumor areas overexpression was found in 13 (72.2%), 9 (50%), and 10 (55.6%) cases respectively. Increased claudin 4 expression was related to advanced stage (p=0.014). There was a significant relationship determined between claudin 4 and 7 expression and decreased survival (p=0.018, p=0.024, respectively)., Conclusion: The fact that a statistically significant relationship was found between claudin 4 expression and advanced stage, and similarly a statistically significant relationship was found between claudin 4 & 7 expression and decreased survival gives rise to thoughts that especially claudin 4 and 7 could have different tumorigenic effects on nasopharyngeal carcinoma besides their known adhesion characteristics.

Recently, there is growing evidence that tight junction proteins are often abnormally regulated in human tumors. The function of tight junction proteins in the maintenance of normal epithelial physiology has been well discussed, but their role in the tumorigenesis of gastric cancer is less well defined. To explore the expression distinction of the tight junction proteins claudin-1, -3, and -4 expression in the gastric cancer, the expression of claudin-1, -3, and -4 in 92 gastric cancer tissues and the non-neoplastic tissues adjacent to the tumors were examined by immunohistochemistry. Compared with adjacent non-neoplastic tissues, the expression of claudin-1 was down regulated. However, the expression of claudin-3 and claudin-4 were up-regulated in gastric cancer tissue. In addition, the expression of claudin-3 is correlated with claudin-4 expression in gastric cancer. Our present study reveals that claudin-1, -3, and -4 protein expression altered between human gastric cancers and adjacent non-neoplastic tissues.

Background: Adenocarcinoma can be challenging to distinguish from malignant mesothelioma in effusions, and this distinction often requires ancillary studies and clinical correlation. Immunohistochemistry for claudin-4, a tight-junction-associated protein, has recently been shown to distinguish adenocarcinoma from malignant mesothelioma, mostly in surgical specimens. Our aim was to validate and assess the immunoreactivity profile of claudin-4 in a large series of malignant effusions., Methods: We evaluated 159 malignant effusions (84 adenocarcinomas and 75 malignant mesotheliomas). Claudin-4 immunohistochemistry was performed on cell-block paraffin sections and scored for staining intensity, staining pattern (cytoplasmic versus membranous), and percentage of positive tumor cells. Appropriate positive and negative controls were used throughout., Results: All cases of mesothelioma were negative for claudin-4 (0 of 64). Eighty-three of 84 cases of adenocarcinoma were positive (99%); 1 case of serous carcinoma was negative. Most adenocarcinomas showed strong and diffuse membranous staining (71 of 84; 84%); 12 cases (14%) showed membranous staining of moderate intensity. The overall sensitivity for adenocarcinoma was 99% (83 of 84)., Conclusions: Claudin-4 immunohistochemistry effectively distinguishes adenocarcinoma from malignant mesothelioma with high sensitivity and specificity in the evaluation of malignant effusions., (© 2014 American Cancer Society.)

Background: There are no clinically useful biomarkers predictive of brain metastases (BM) in breast cancer. In this study, we investigated the correlation between expression of selected proteins in the primary tumor and the risk of BM in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC)., Methods: The study included 198 MBC patients (96 with and 102 without BM). Using tissue microarrays derived from the primary tumor, we assessed by immunohistochemical expression of ER, PR, HER2, Ki-67, CK5/6, EGFR, HER3, CXCR4, Rad51, E-cadherin, and claudin 3 and 4., Results: Ki-67 ≥14% (hazard ratio [HR] 2.76; P < 0.001), cytoplasmic expression of Rad51 (HR 1.87; P = 0.014) and ER-negativity (HR 1.72; P = 0.029) were associated with increased risk of BM in the multivariate analysis. A three-biomarker profile including ER, Ki-67 and Rad51 vs. other subtypes combined yielded an HR of 4.43 (P < 0.001)., Conclusions: ER-negativity, cytoplasmic expression of Rad51 and high Ki-67 are associated with increased risk of BM., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

We compared claudin-4 with Ber-EP4 and carcinoembryonic antigen as markers to distinguish mesothelioma from lung adenocarcinoma, poorly differentiated lung squamous cell carcinoma, and serous adenocarcinoma of the uterus or ovary. All mesothelioma specimens were negative for claudin-4, but 3 of 18 specimens were focally positive for Ber-EP4. In contrast, lung adenocarcinoma including poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma was highly positive for claudin-4, but expression of Ber-EP4 and carcinoembryonic antigen varied widely. Claudin-4 in poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma had a lower positive expression rate than in adenocarcinoma. Granular claudin-4 immunoreactivity was conspicuous in poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma; this immunoreactive pattern was also observed in mesothelioma. Claudin-4 was thus considered very useful marker for distinguishing mesothelioma and adenocarcinoma, even if histological specimens are small, as in biopsies that contain limited numbers of tumor cells. However, it should be mentioned that claudin-4 has a limit in discrimination between squamous cell carcinoma from mesothelioma.

Distinguishing between peritoneal epithelioid mesotheliomas and papillary serous carcinomas involving the peritoneum can be difficult on routine histological preparations, but this differential diagnosis can be facilitated by the use of immunohistochemistry. Recent investigations have indicated that PAX8, PAX2, claudin-4, and h-caldesmon are immunohistochemical markers that can assist in distinguishing between these two malignancies; however, much of the information published on the value of these markers is either insufficient or contradictory. The purpose of this study is to resolve some of the existing controversies and to fully determine the practical value of these markers for assisting in the differential diagnosis between peritoneal mesotheliomas and serous carcinomas. In order to do so, a total of 40 peritoneal epithelioid mesotheliomas and 45 serous carcinomas (15 primary, 30 metastatic to the peritoneum) were investigated. PAX8 and PAX2 nuclear positivity was demonstrated in 42 (93%) and 25 (56%) of the serous carcinomas, respectively, whereas none of the mesotheliomas expressed either marker. Forty-four (98%) of the serous carcinomas exhibited claudin-4 reactivity along the cell membrane, whereas none of the mesotheliomas were positive for this marker. All of the serous carcinomas and mesotheliomas were negative for h-caldesmon. Based on these results, it is concluded that PAX8 and claudin-4 have a higher sensitivity and specificity for assisting in discriminating between peritoneal epithelioid mesotheliomas and serous carcinomas when compared with all of the other positive carcinoma markers that are, at present, recommended to be included in the immunohistochemical panels used in this differential diagnosis. Even though it is highly specific, PAX2 has little practical value in the diagnosis of peritoneal epithelioid mesotheliomas as its sensitivity is low. The h-caldesmon is not useful.

Aims and Background: Differential diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma is sometimes difficult to accurately perform., Methods: Eight markers including cytokeratin 7 (CK7), cytokeratin 19 (CK19), MOC31, CD10, glypican 3 (GPC3), claudin 4, biglycan and high mobility group A1 (HMGA1) were immunohistochemically stained in samples from 179 surgically resected hepatocellular carcinomas and 127 intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas, and the rates of marker expression were statistically compared., Results: With the exception of biglycan, 7 of the 8 markers were found to have significantly different expression patterns when comparing the two types of cancer (P <0.05). In intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas, the expression rates of CK7, CK19, MOC31, claudin 4 and HMGA1 were 83.4%, 89.0%, 88.2%, 69.2%, and 31.5%, respectively. These rates of expression in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas were all higher than in those in hepatocellular carcinomas (CK7, 31.3%; CK19, 10.1%; MOC31, 34.0%; claudin 4, 11.2%; and HMGA1, 19.5%). The expression rates of GPC3, CD10, and biglycan were 72.6%, 39.7% and 10.0%, respectively, in hepatocellular carcinoma. These were higher than the rates found in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas (GPC3, 7.0%; CD10, 18.1%; and biglycan, 7.0%). In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, GPC3, CK19, MOC31 and claudin 4 were found to be independent markers for differentially diagnosing intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma., Conclusions: Based on our results, GPC3 and CK19 can be used as first-line markers for differential diagnoses of hepatocellular carcinoma and intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (accuracy rate, 73.5%), and additional combined screening for claudin 4 and MOC31 markers in GPC3(-) and CK19(-) tumors might increase the accuracy rate for distinguishing hepatocellular carcinoma from intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma to 88.5%.