Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Karger Publishers, Pathobiology, 3-4(82), p. 166-171, 2015

DOI: 10.1159/000375127

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Evaluation of p40 as a Myoepithelial Marker in Different Breast Lesions

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

<b><i>Objective:</i></b> The identification of myoepithelial cells (MEC) is a valuable clue in the differential diagnosis of breast lesions. A series of breast lesions with occasional absence of or decrease in the staining for some MEC markers was analyzed for the expression of a novel marker, p40, and results were compared to the p63 staining profile. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Samples (n = 34) from patients with benign sclerosing lesions (n = 11), ductal carcinoma in situ (n = 13) and adenomyoepithelial lesions (n = 10) and associated normal breast tissues (n = 31) were selected to evaluate the differential expression of p40 and p63 using immunohistochemistry. Triple-negative, cytokeratin 5 (CK5)-expressing invasive breast carcinomas (n = 19) were also assessed for p40 expression. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Normal structures showed similar diffuse and strong MEC positivity using p40 and p63 in all 31 cases. The two antibodies performed similarly in all 34 breast lesions acknowledged to present altered expression of MEC markers; focal losses of expression occurred in a parallel fashion. CK5-positive carcinomas expressed p40 more frequently than p63 (18/19 vs. 8/19) and the staining was more marked. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> It seems that both antibodies can be used interchangeably for MEC identification, but show differences in the labeling at least in a subset of tumor cells in triple-negative carcinomas.