Premium
Monoclonal antibodies in the cytodiagnosis of serous effusions
Author(s) -
ALNAFUSSI A.,
CARDER P. J.
Publication year - 1990
Publication title -
cytopathology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.512
H-Index - 48
eISSN - 1365-2303
pISSN - 0956-5507
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2303.1990.tb00336.x
Subject(s) - mesothelial cell , serous fluid , pathology , medicine , antigen , staining , antibody , monoclonal antibody , mucin , cytokeratin , mesothelioma , immunohistochemistry , carcinoembryonic antigen , stain , malignancy , immunology , cancer
In order to assess the value of immunocytochemical staining as a method of discriminating between benign reactive mesothelial cells and malignant epithelial cells in serous effusions, we have studied the reactions of a panel of commercially available antibodies on cells harvested from 83 pleural and peritoneal fluids and compared the results with the clinical and cytological diagnoses. The antibodies used were raised against cytokeratin (PKK1), epithelial membrane antigen (EMA), carcino‐embryonic antigen (CEA), pregnancy specific B1‐glycoprotein (SP1) and leucocyte common antigen (LCA). Anti‐CEA was positive in 16 of 39 effusions (41%) containing carcinoma cells. Pregnancy specific Bl‐glycoprotein (SP1) was positive in 33% of the same samples. Mesothelial cells did not stain with these antibodies. Thus anti‐CEA and SP1 can be used to discriminate between benign mesothelial and malignant epithelial cells in effusions. Anti‐PKK1 stained both benign reactive mesothelial cells and malignant epithelial cells and cannot be used to discriminate between these two cell types. Strong positive staining of malignant cells was noted with anti‐EMA. However, as occasional weak staining of mesothelial cells was also noted, strong staining with this antibody may be regarded as suspicious but not conclusive of malignancy.