Premium
Recent advances of immunohistochemistry for diagnosis of renal tumors
Author(s) -
Kuroda Naoto,
Tanaka Azusa,
Ohe Chisato,
Nagashima Yoji
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
pathology international
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.73
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1440-1827
pISSN - 1320-5463
DOI - 10.1111/pin.12080
Subject(s) - chromophobe cell , renal cell carcinoma , pathology , cytokeratin , immunohistochemistry , oncocytoma , clear cell , papillary renal cell carcinomas , renal oncocytoma , medicine , pax8 , biology , biochemistry , transcription factor , gene
The recent classification of renal tumors has been proposed according to genetic characteristics as well as morphological difference. In this review, we summarize the immunohistochemical characteristics of each entity of renal tumors. Regarding translocation renal cell carcinoma ( RCC ), TFE 3, TFEB and ALK protein expression is crucial in establishing the diagnosis of X p11.2 RCC , renal carcinoma with t(6;11)(p21;q12), and renal carcinoma with ALK rearrangement, respectively. In dialysis‐related RCC , neoplastic cells of acquired cystic disease‐associated RCC are positive for alpha‐methylacyl‐ CoA racemase ( AMACR ), but negative for cytokeratin ( CK ) 7, whereas clear cell papillary RCC shows the inverse pattern. The diffuse positivity for carbonic anhydrase 9 ( CA 9) is diagnostic for clear cell RCC . Co‐expression of CK 7 and CA 9 is characteristic of multilocular cystic RCC . CK 7 and AMACR are excellent markers for papillary RCC and mucinous tubular and spindle cell carcinoma. CD 82 and epithelial‐related antigen ( MOC 31) may be helpful in the distinction between chromophobe RCC and renal oncocytoma. WT 1 and CD 57 highlights the diagnosis of metanephric adenoma. The combined panel of PAX 2 and PAX 8 may be useful in the diagnosis of metastatic RCC .