PRAME immunohistochemistry as an adjunct for evaluating ambiguous melanocytic proliferation

Shedding light on PRAME expression in dysplastic nevi: a cohort study

Dysplastic nevi represent one of the least agreed-upon entities in dermatopathology despite the existence of established criteria. This study explores preferentially expressed antigen in melanoma (PRAME) in dysplastic nevi, an uncharted area. We examined 22 common melanocytic nevi (CMN), 20 cutaneous melanomas (CM), 48 low-grade dysplastic nevi (LG-DN), and 40 high-grade dysplastic nevi (HG-DN). PRAME was immunohistochemically assessed using a five-tiered system (0 to 4 +). Among CMN, 59% scored 0, 32% scored 1 + , and 9% scored 2 + . CM had score 2 + and 4 + in 11% and 89% of cases, respectively. Among LG-DN, 38% presented score 0, 31% score 1 + , 17% score 2 + , 8% score 3 + , and 6% score 4 + . Thirty per cent of HG-DN demonstrated a score 0, 30% with score 1 + , 15% score 2 + , 10% score 3 + , and 15% score 4 + . Compared to CMN and CM, LG-DN and HG-DN showed heterogeneous expression profiles of PRAME. PRAME positivity effectively distinguished HG-DN from CM with 85% specificity and 80% sensitivity (p < 0.0001). Predictive values were 87% (negative) and 76% (positive). Furthermore, a trend of increased PRAME expression from LG-DN to HG-DN was observed. However, the applicability of PRAME in the differential diagnosis of dysplastic lesions remains unclear as can yield conflicting results with morphology, which remains the primary diagnostic tool for melanocytic lesions.

PRAME and Historical Immunohistochemical Antibodies Ki-67, P16, and HMB-45 in Ambiguous Melanocytic Tumors

ABSTRACT

Ambiguous melanocytic lesions/tumors (AMLs) can be simply described as melanocytic neoplasms that cannot be differentiated as either a melanoma or a nevus. Preferentially expressed antigen in melanoma (PRAME) is a novel antibody that can help differentiate between nevi and melanomas. However, its usefulness remains controversial in AMLs. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the importance of PRAME and diagnostic auxiliary antibodies (Ki-67, p16, HMB-45) in the diagnosis of melanocytic lesions, especially in AMLs. This study included 52 ambiguous melanocytic lesions, 40 nevi, and 40 melanomas. All immunohistochemical studies were performed automatically using the Universal Alkaline Phosphatase Red Detection Kit. Different analytic approaches were used for each antibody based on the literature. Statistically, the multinomial forward stepwise elimination logistic regression analysis was used to create a statistical model to predict the diagnosis of melanocytic lesions based on clinical, morphological, and immunohistochemical data. PRAME positivity was very strong and diffuse in the melanoma group and statistically significantly higher than that of the AML and nevus groups. There was no statistically significant difference between the nevus and AML groups. The Ki-67 proliferation index and HMB-45 staining pattern provided valuable indications for distinguishing between these 3 groups. The P16 antibody was limited in supporting the differential diagnosis. Our statistical model showed that a high mitosis count, central pagetoid spread, and PRAME positivity increased the probability of melanoma against an AML diagnosis. This study showed the advantages of evaluating the PRAME antibody together with morphological features and other immunohistochemical markers (Ki-67 and HMB-45) in the differential diagnosis of melanocytic lesions.

Immunohistochemistry Update in Dermatopathology and Bone and Soft Tissue Pathology

CONTEXT.—

Immunohistochemistry plays an important role in dermatopathology, particularly for melanocytic lesions and poorly differentiated malignancies. In the field of bone and soft tissue pathology, molecular methods remain the gold standard for diagnosis; however, immunohistochemistry targeting underlying molecular alterations represents a valuable screening tool, especially in areas with limited access to molecular testing.

OBJECTIVE.—

To describe the utility and limitations of new and emerging immunohistochemical stains in the diagnosis of skin, soft tissue, and bone tumors.

DATA SOURCES.—

A literature review of recently described immunohistochemical stains in the fields of dermatopathology and bone and soft tissue pathology was performed.

CONCLUSIONS.—

Immunohistochemistry is an important adjunctive tool for select entities in dermatopathology and bone and soft tissue pathology, and it provides pathologists with valuable evidence of their behavior, underlying molecular alterations, and line of differentiation. Furthermore, immunostains targeting molecular abnormalities have the potential to replace current molecular methods. Many of these recently described stains demonstrate higher sensitivity and specificity; however, limitations and pitfalls still exist, and correlation with morphologic and clinical findings remains essential for diagnosis.

Immunohistochemistry for PRAME in Dermatopathology

ABSTRACT

Preferentially expressed antigen in melanoma (PRAME) is a tumor-associated antigen first identified in a melanoma patient and found to be expressed in most melanomas as well as in variable levels in other malignant neoplasms of epithelial, mesenchymal, or hematolymphoid lineage. Detection of PRAME expression in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue is possible by immunohistochemistry (IHC) with commercially available monoclonal antibodies. In situ and invasive melanoma frequently show a diffuse pattern of nuclear PRAME immunoreactivity which contrasts with the infrequent and typically nondiffuse staining seen in nevi. In many challenging melanocytic tumors, results of PRAME IHC and other ancillary tests correlate well, but not always: The tests are not interchangeable. Most metastatic melanomas are positive for PRAME, whereas nodal nevi are not. Numerous studies on PRAME IHC have become available in the past few years with results supporting the value of PRAME IHC as an ancillary tool in the evaluation of melanocytic lesions and providing insights into limitations in sensitivity and specificity as well as possible pitfalls that need to be kept in mind by practicing pathologists.

PRAME expression in 137 primary cutaneous melanomas and comparison with 38 related metastases

Melanocytic lesions have always represented a diagnostic challenge for surgical pathologists. According to the literature, PRAME showed great promise as an immunohistochemical tool in the distinction between benign and malignant melanocytic lesions. In the present study, we retrospectively analyzed 137 thicker (Breslow > 1 mm) primary cutaneous melanomas with the aim to better understand the utility of PRAME immunohistochemistry in daily practice and also to investigate if PRAME could represent a prognostic biomarker for cutaneous melanomas. PRAME immunohistochemistry was performed in all melanomas and in the metastases with antibodies to PRAME (dilution 1:1000, clone Ab219650) on an automated immunostainer (Ventana Benchmark Ultra) using a brown chromogen (DAB). We found that melanomas (59.1%) show diffuse PRAME expression (score 4 +). 99 (72.3%) primary cutaneous melanoma had no relapse during the follow-up. Of this group of melanomas, 61/99 (61.6%) were diffusely positive for PRAME. 38 (27.7%) primary cutaneous melanoma had relapses. Of this group, 28/36 (77.7%) were diffusely positive. We did not find any statistical correlation between diffuse PRAME expression and the presence of driver mutation in BRAF gene (p = 0.927), NRAS gene (p = 0.496) or either of the two (p = 0.138). We did not find a prognostic significance of diffuse PRAME expression for relapse (p = 0.462) or survival rate (p = 0.245). The prognostic value of PRAME has been only reported in mucosal, uveal and cutaneous thin melanomas. Here, we show statistical analyses on PRAME expression for melanoma with Breslow > 1 mm based on survival rate and long-term follow-up. According to our results, PRAME is a useful immunohistochemical ancillary tool in daily practice diagnosis of melanocytic lesions.

Diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis of PRAME in distinguishing primary cutaneous melanomas from benign melanocytic lesions

PRAME is a novel immunohistochemical marker that aids the diagnosis of melanocytic lesions. Diffuse PRAME positivity suggests melanoma, whereas benign naevi are negative or only weakly positive. However, the factual diagnostic accuracy of PRAME is not well established. Moreover, some studies have suggested that the threshold of 3+/50% positive cells may be more useful in practice than the most widely used cut-off (4+/75% of positive cells). Hence, we performed a systematic review and diagnostic accuracy meta-analysis to evaluate sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and optimal threshold for PRAME in distinguishing benign melanocytic proliferations from melanomas. Twenty-six studies were enrolled into the meta-analysis. A total of 2915 melanocytic lesions were analysed. The optimal threshold for PRAME positivity was estimated at 3.11, which translates into 3+ in practice. Sensitivity and specificity calculated from SROC at the 3+ threshold were 0.735 (0.631-0.818) and 0.915 (0.834-0.958), respectively, compared to 0.679 (0.559-0.957) and 0.957 (0.908-0.981) at the 4+ cut-off. In subgroup analysis, the spitzoid subgroup was characterised by the lowest sensitivity and diagnostic odds ratio of PRAME. Our findings indicate that PRAME immunohistochemistry may serve as an ancillary marker to support the diagnosis of melanoma. Nevertheless, the accuracy of PRAME may be lower in spitzoid neoplasms. Our meta-analysis suggests that the 3+/50% threshold might be more useful in practice than the 4+/75% cut-off, as it shows higher sensitivity with retained satisfactory specificity.

Preferentially Expressed Antigen in Melanoma (PRAME) and Human Malignant Melanoma: A Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Preferentially expressed antigen in melanoma (PRAME) is a cancer testis antigen (CTA) identified in 1997 through analysis of the specificity of tumor-reactive T-cell clones derived from a patient with metastatic cutaneous melanoma. Although at first it seemed even more specific, various studies have shown that PRAME can also be expressed in the context of atypical lesions that do not correspond solely to the definition of malignant melanoma.

METHODS

A systematic review of English articles was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

RESULTS

126 records were identified in the literature search, of which 9 were duplicates. After screening for eligibility and inclusion criteria, 53 publications were included.

CONCLUSIONS

The advent of a new marker such as PRAME is surely a step forward not only in the diagnostic approach, but also in the immunotherapeutic approach to MM. However, various studies have shown that PRAME can also be expressed in the context of atypical lesions apart from MM and, for this reason, the diagnostic sensitivity and specificity (hence accuracy) are clearly lower. Further studies with larger case series will be necessary to understand better what possibilities are offered in terms of diagnostic reliability by PRAME.

PRAME Immunocytochemistry for the Diagnosis of Melanoma Metastases in Cytological Samples

(1) Background: Fine-needle aspiration cytology is often used for the pre-operative diagnosis of melanoma metastases. The diagnosis may not be confidently established based on morphology alone, and immunocytochemistry is mandatory. The choice of the most advantageous immunocytochemical antibodies is critical, as the sample may be scant, and the presence of pigmented histiocytes may be confounding. However, the diagnostic performance of melanocytic markers in this setting is poorly investigated. Moreover, PRAME (preferentially expressed antigen in melanoma) recently emerged as a novel marker for the diagnosis of melanoma. The current work aimed to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of PRAME for the diagnosis of melanoma metastases in cytological samples, compared to other melanocytic markers. (2) Methods: PRAME, S100, Melan-A, HMB45 and SOX10 were tested on cell block sections of 48 cases of melanoma metastases diagnosed from cytological samples, and 20 cases of reactive lymphadenopathy. (3) Results: S100 and SOX10 showed the highest sensitivity (100%), while the sensitivity of PRAME was 85.4%. PRAME, Melan-A, SOX10 and HMB45 showed a specificity of 100%, while the specificity of S100 was lower (85%), as it marked some histiocytes. (4) Conclusion: PRAME immunocytochemistry is highly specific for the diagnosis of melanoma metastasis from a cytological sample, but is less sensitive compared with other melanocytic markers.