HMB45/PRAME, a Novel Double Staining for the Diagnosis of Melanocytic Neoplasms: Technical Aspects, Results, and Comparison With Other Commercially Available Staining (PRAME and Melan A/PRAME)

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.

Clinical implication of PRAME immunohistochemistry in differentiating melanoma in situ and dysplastic nevus in non-acral nevus-associated melanoma in situ: An institutional experience and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

PReferentially expressed Antigen in MElanoma (PRAME) has shown utility in differentiating benign from malignant melanocytic neoplasms. In this study, we investigated the clinical significance of PRAME expression in dysplastic nevi (DN) and nevus-associated melanoma in situ (MIS).

METHODS

We included 172 DN and 38 nevus-associated MIS from our institutional archive. PRAME positive expression was defined as nuclear staining in at least 75% of melanocytes. In addition, relevant studies from PubMed and Web of Science were incorporated into a meta-analysis using the random-effects model to assess PRAME expression in MIS and DN.

RESULTS

Our institutional data revealed that 71.1% of nevus-associated MIS cases exhibited positive PRAME expression in the MIS components, whereas all DN components were negative for PRAME. 5.7% of cases diagnosed as DN in our cohort demonstrated diffuse positivity for PRAME. Notably, MIS associated with DN displaying epidermal and dermal components displayed a higher likelihood of PRAME positivity compared to those arising on a background of DN with solely epidermal (junctional) components (84% vs. 46%, p = 0.024). The meta-analysis indicated that the pooled PRAME positivity in MIS and DN was 54.5% and 1.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

PRAME is a valuable immunohistochemical marker for differentiating MIS from DN, particularly in the context of nevus-associated MIS.

Digital quantification of PRAME for distinguishing melanoma from nevi compared to manual assessment

AIMS

In this proof-of-concept study, we propose a new method for automated digital quantification of PRAME (PReferentially expressed Antigen of MElanoma) as a diagnostic aid to distinguish between benign and malignant melanocytic lesions. The proposed method utilizes immunohistochemical virtual double nuclear staining for PRAME and SOX10 to precisely identify the melanocytic cells of interest, which is combined with digital image analyse to quantify a PRAME-index.

METHODS

Our study included 10 compound nevi, 3 halo nevi, and 10 melanomas. Tissue slides were stained with PRAME, scanned, the cover glass removed, stained with SOX10, scanned again, and finally analysed digitally. The digitally quantified PRAME-index was compared with a manual qualitative assessment by a dermatopathologist using the standard PRAME-scoring system.

RESULTS

The digitally quantified PRAME-index showed a sensitivity of 70 % and a specificity of 100 % for separating melanomas from benign lesions. The manual qualitative PRAME-score showed a sensitivity of 60 % and a specificity of 100 %. Comparing the two methods using ROC-analyses, our digital quantitative method (AUC: 0.931, 95 % CI: 0.834;1.00, SD: 0.050) remains on par with the manual qualitative method (AUC: 0.877, 95 % CI: 0.725;1.00, SD: 0.078).

CONCLUSION

We found our novel digital quantitative method was at least as precise at classifying lesions as benign or malignant as the current manual qualitative assessment. Our method has the advantages of being operator-independent, objective, and replicable. Furthermore, our method can easily be implemented in an already digitalized pathology department. Given the small cohort size, more studies are to be done to validate our findings.

PRAME Immunohistochemistry in Thin Melanomas Compared to Melanocytic Nevi

PRAME (PReferentially expressed Antigen in Melanoma) immunohistochemistry has proven helpful in distinguishing malignant from benign melanocytic tumors. We studied PRAME IHC expression in 46 thin melanomas and 39 melanocytic nevi, mostly dysplastic nevi. Twenty-six percent (26.09%) of the melanomas showed diffuse PRAME staining in over 76% of the tumor cells (4+), and 34.78% of the melanomas showed PRAME expression in over 51% of the tumor cells (3+ or 4+), while 8% were entirely negative for PRAME. No melanocytic nevi were PRAME 4+ or 3+. More than half of the nevi (64%) were entirely negative for PRAME staining, and 36% of the nevi showed staining expression in 1-25% (1+) or 26-50% of the cells (2+). No nevi were stained with a color intensity of 3, while 16.67% of the melanomas were stained with this color intensity. Most nevi (78.57%) were stained with an intensity of 1. With a lower positivity threshold, sensitivity increases with still reasonable specificity. The best accuracy was obtained for the 2+ positivity threshold. In conclusion, PRAME staining helps distinguish thin melanomas from dysplastic nevi. However, the threshold of positivity should be lowered in order not to miss thin melanomas.

The Expression of PRAME as an Aid for Diagnosis and Evaluation of Histologic Margins of Intraepidermal Cutaneous Melanoma in Xeroderma Pigmentosum Patients

Xeroderma Pigmentosum (XP) is a genetic disorder characterized by photosensitivity, dyschromia, and high risk of skin cancer. From a clinical and histologic view, it can be difficult to diagnose cutaneous melanoma (CM) in XP patients and to define its resection margins. We aimed to study the role of PRAME (PReferentially Expressed Antigen in MElanoma) in differentiating intraepidermal CM from superficial atypical melanocytic proliferation of uncertain significance (SAMPUS) and evaluating the histological margins of CMs. We included XP patients. melanocitic and nonmelanocytic lesions with adjacent skin, and, as control groups, sun-damaged skin from non-XP individuals. Melanocytic lesions with a consensus diagnosis were grouped into CM, SAMPUS, or benign. The selected samples were PRAME-immunoshistochemically stained, and the ratio between immuno-positive cells/mm was recorded, according to Olds and colleagues for intraepidermal lesions. Lezcano and colleagues' method was used for intradermal lesions. Clinical data from XP patients were reviewed. All 9 patients were alive and well at the study closure, even those who developed melanoma metastases. Positive/diffuse PRAME expression was found in 29% (7/24) of intraepidermal CMs and 20% (1/5) SAMPUS samples. All 103 XP control samples and 24 adjacent lesions skin of non-XP patients were PRAME negative. This was a single-center and retrospective study, using a relatively small sample, limiting our conclusions. In XP patients' lesions, PRAME expression could help in the setting of challenging melanocytic tumors and surgical margins evaluation. It is also possible that the method can avoid overdiagnosis and, consequently, more aggressive treatment recommendation in unequivocal CM cases.

Double Immunohistochemical Labelling of PRAME and Melan A in Slow Mohs Biopsy Margin Assessment of Lentigo Maligna and Lentigo Maligna Melanoma

Introduction: Lentigo maligna (LM) and lentigo maligna melanoma (LMM) predominantly affect the head and neck areas in elderly patients, presenting as challenging ill-defined pigmented lesions with indistinct borders. Surgical margin determination for complete removal remains intricate due to these characteristics. Morphological examination of surgical margins is the key form of determining successful treatment in LM/LMM and underpin the greater margin control provided through the Slow Mohs micrographic surgery (SMMS) approach. Recent assessments have explored the use of immunohistochemistry (IHC) markers, such as Preferentially Expressed Antigen in Melanoma (PRAME), to aid in LM/LMM and margin evaluation, leveraging the selectivity of PRAME labelling in malignant melanocytic neoplasms. Methods: A Novel double-labelling (DL) method incorporating both PRAME and MelanA IHC was employed to further maximise the clinical applicability of PRAME in the assessment of LM/LMM in SMMS biopsies. The evaluation involved 51 samples, comparing the results of the novel DL with respective single-labelling (SL) IHC slides. Results: The findings demonstrated a significant agreement of 96.1% between the DL method and SL slides across the tested samples. The benchmark PRAME SL exhibited a sensitivity of 91.3% in the SMMS specimens and 67.9% in histologically confirmed positive margins. Discussion: This study highlights the utility of PRAME IHC and by extension PRAME DL as an adjunctive tool in the assessment of melanocytic tumours within staged excision margins in SMMS samples.

PRAME Is an Effective Tool for the Diagnosis of Nevus-Associated Cutaneous Melanoma

(1) Background: Nevus-associated cutaneous melanoma (CM) is relatively common in the clinical practice of dermatopathologists. The correct diagnosis and staging of nevus-associated cutaneous melanoma (CM) mainly relies on the correct discrimination between benign and malignant cells. Recently, PRAME has emerged as a promising immunohistochemical marker of malignant melanocytes. (2) Methods: PRAME immunohistochemistry (IHC) was performed in 69 cases of nevus-associated CMs. Its expression was evaluated using a score ranging from 0 to 4+ based on the percentage of melanocytic cells with a nuclear expression. PRAME IHC sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values, and negative predictive values were assessed. Furthermore, the agreement between morphological data and PRAME expression was evaluated for the diagnosis of melanoma components and nevus components. (3) Results: PRAME IHC showed a sensitivity of 59%, a specificity of 100%, a positive predictive value of 100%, and a negative predictive value of 71%. The diagnostic agreement between morphology and PRAME IHC was fair (Cohen's Kappa: 0.3); the diagnostic agreement regarding the benign nevus components associated with CM was perfect (Cohen's Kappa: 1.0). PRAME was significantly more expressed in thick invasive CMs than in thin cases (p = 0.02). (4) Conclusions: PRAME IHC should be considered for the diagnostic evaluation of nevus-associated CM and is most useful in cases of thick melanomas. Pathologists should carefully consider that a PRAME-positive cellular population within the context of a nevus could indicate a CM associated with the nevus. A negative result does not rule out this possibility.

Diagnostic utility of combining PRAME and HMB-45 stains in primary melanocytic tumors

BACKGROUND

Pathologists face ongoing challenges distinguishing between benign and malignant melanocytic tumors. PRAME (PReferentially expressed Antigen in Melanoma) has a demonstrated value distinguishing between these types of lesions. However, the sensitivity of single immunohistochemistry is variable. HMB-45 is another valuable marker, but on its own, has a limited ability in setting of primary melanocytic tumors. This study sought to evaluate the diagnostic potential of a dual panel combining PRAME and HMB-45 in the assessment of primary melanocytic tumors.

METHODS

259 tumors, of which 141 were benign nevi, 31 dysplastic nevi (either low- or high grade dysplasia), and further 87 malignant melanomas, were retrieved from the department's archives and assessed by two experienced dermatopathologists. New sections were stained with PRAME and HMB-45, respectively. For PRAME, a nuclear, and for HMB-45, a cytoplasmic staining, was considered positive and scored as described in the literature on a scale from 0 to 4+. Only dermal component was assessed on HMB-45 stain.

RESULTS

PRAME was diffusely expressed in only 1 benign nevus, with focal expression in further 28 compared to 22 diffusely and 103 focally HMB-45-positive benign nevi. 5 high-grade dysplastic nevi showed diffuse PRAME expression in epidermal component, with varying degree of positivity in adjacent dermal compartment, and further 8 dysplastic nevi showed only focal expression. HMB-45 was diffusely expressed in only 2, with focal expression in 23, and no apparent positivity in remaining 6 dysplastic nevi. In invasive melanoma group, PRAME stained >75 % cells in 64/87 tumors, however, 10/87 melanomas were completely negative. HMB-45 was captured diffusely in 49/87 melanomas, 32 showed patchy expression, and 6 tumors were blank negative. Diffuse 4+ PRAME positivity showed superior sensitivity and specificity of 73,6 % and 96,5 %, respectively, compared to HMB-45, 56,3 % and 86,0 %, respectively. No nevi showed double 4+ positivity, however, the sensitivity for double positivity was only 49,4 %.

CONCLUSION

Our results confirm the superiority of PRAME over HMB-45 in the differential diagnosis of melanocytic tumors. However, combined staining can significantly increase specificity, rendering a benign diagnosis more unlikely in a double 4+ diffuse positivity setting.

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/MELAN-A double immunostaining as a diagnostic tool for conjunctival melanocytic lesions: A South American experience

INTRODUCTION

PRAME (PReferentially expressed Antigen in Melanoma) is an antigen that is predominantly expressed in human melanomas. In cutaneous melanocytic lesions, PRAME expression is associated with malignancy. The objective of this study was to evaluate the co-expression of PRAME and Melan A to evaluate their diagnostic value in different conjunctival melanocytic lesions (CML).

METHODS

37 CML (23 nevi, 9 primary acquired melanosis (PAM), and 5 conjunctival melanomas) were evaluated by immunohistochemistry for PRAME and Melan-A. The percentage of melanocytic cells co-expressing PRAME and Melan-A was qualitatively evaluated as follows: negative, 0%; 1 + , 1-25%; 2 + , 26-50%; 3 + , 51-75% and 4 + , ≥ 76%.

RESULTS

Of the invasive melanoma cases, 80% showed a 4 + pattern of marking, whereas 20% showed a 3 + pattern. 11% of the PAMs showed a 4 + pattern and 88.9% showed a 1 + pattern. All the nevi showed a 1 + pattern. The sensitivity and specificity of PRAME 4 + for differentiating high-grade CML from the benign and low-grade grouped CML are 93% and 100%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

PRAME/MELAN-A double immunostain is particularly useful to differentiate benign from malignant conjunctival melanocytic lesions.

"Paradoxical" p16 overexpression in cutaneous melanoma: Molecular and immunohistochemical analysis of a rare phenomenon with a focus on cell cycle regulatory molecules

BACKGROUND

One of the most relevant genetic alterations in cutaneous melanoma (CM) is the biallelic inactivation/loss-of-heterozygosis (LOH) of cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2 A (CDKN2A), which results in the immunohistochemical loss of p16 frequently found in CM. However, we recently described a rare case of dermal/deep-seated melanoma arising in giant congenital nevus (DDM-GCN) with p16 overexpression combined with p53 loss and tumor protein 53 (TP53) mutation. Herein, we reported a case series of CM with p16 overexpression and analyzed their clinicopathologic features, immunohistochemical expression of the cell cycle regulatory molecules (CCRM: p53, p21, Cyclin D1, Rb), and mutational landscape.

METHODS

We retrospectively tested for p16 all cases of CM diagnosed at our institution between January 1st 2019-April 1st 2022. In CM with p16 overexpression, we reported clinicopathologic features, immunohistochemical results for melanocytic markers and CCRM, and mutational landscape investigated with a next-generation sequencing (NGS) panel. In cases with zonal p16 overexpression, the immunohistochemical assessment for melanocytic markers and CCRM, as well as the NGS analysis have been performed in both components {with and without p16 overexpression [p16(+)c and p16(-)]}.

RESULTS

Overexpression of p16 was found in 10/2879 (0.35%) CM [5/10 (50%) diffuse and 5/10 (50%) zonal]. We combined the immunohistochemical results for CCRM and molecular data to classify the cases as follows: a) Group 1 with altered expression of at least one CCRM but no TP53 mutations [3/10 (30%), all with Rb altered/lost]; b) Group 2 with altered expression of at least one CCRM and TP53 mutations [4/10 (40%), all with p53 altered]; c) Group 3 with normal expression of CCRM and no TP53 mutations [3/10 (30%), all with mutations in MAPK pathway genes (NRAS and BRAF)]. In CM with zonal p16 overexpression, the histologic appearance of p16(+)c was heterogeneous, whereas combining CCRM profiles and molecular data the cases could be categorized as follows: a) cases with the same CCRM and molecular profiles in both p16(+)c and p16(-)c; b) cases with p16(+)c showing additional genetic mutations and/or modifications of CCRM expression.

CONCLUSIONS

p16 overexpression is a rare event, occurring in advanced-stage, clinically- and histologically-heterogeneous CM. These lesions may be classified into three different groups based on CCRM expression and mutational profiles (including TP53 mutation). The analysis of CM with zonal p16 overexpression suggests that, at least in a subset of cases, this phenomenon could represent a sign of "molecular progression" due to the acquisition of additional genetic mutations and/or modifications of the CCRM profile.

PRAME Expression in Mucosal Melanoma of the Head and Neck Region

PRAME (PReferentially expressed Antigen in MElanoma), a cancer-testis antigen expressed in normal and neoplastic tissues with several functions, proved to be a useful diagnostic tool in the differential diagnosis between benign and malignant melanocytic lesions. The current study aims to perform PRAME stain on a retrospective case series of mucosal melanocytic tumors of the head and neck region to compare 3 different scores and evaluate the most reliable one in this diagnostic set. Immunohistochemical analysis for PRAME was performed in 54 benign and malignant mucosal melanocytic tumors of the head and neck region collected from 41 patients. The best-performing cutoff of PRAME-positive cells (nuclear stain) to differentiate benign and malignant mucosal melanocytic tumors of the head and neck region is that proposed by Raghavan and colleagues (<60%/≥60% of PRAME-positive cells), with 100% and 77.8% of benign lesions and malignant tumors respectively correctly identified. Applying this score, PRAME stain showed the best results (sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values) for the diagnosis of head and neck melanocytic tumors. However, a subset of PRAME-negative malignant tumors was identified, especially located in the palatal area (hard and soft palate). Finally, high PRAME expression (≥60%) was associated with specific sites (nasal cavity/nasal septum/turbinates nasopharynx, and the maxillary sinus), nodular histotype, and female sex.

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.

H&E and OCT4/CD34 for the assessment of lympho-vascular invasion in seminoma and embryonal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Lymphovascular invasion (LVI) is a relevant prognostic factor in germ cell tumors of the testis (GCTT), and it is included in the pT stage. However, its detection on hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) slides is very challenging, and previous studies reported fair to moderate inter-observer agreement among dedicated uropathologists. In the present study, we tested H&E and a recently developed in-house double staining for OCT4/CD34 to detect LVI in GCTT.

METHODS

Nine authors [5 non-uropathologists and 4 uropathologists] independently evaluated 34 consecutive and retrospectively enrolled cases of GCTT. We assessed the inter-observer agreement (Fleiss's Kappa) with both H&E and OCT4/CD34. Besides, we compared the consensus diagnosis on both H&E and OCT4/CD34-stained sections with the original diagnosis to evaluate the pT re-staging (McNemar test) and identify the sources of disagreement.

RESULTS

The inter-observer agreement among uropathologists plus non-uropathologists was fair with both H&E (KF=0.398; p < 0.001) and OCT4/CD34 (KF=0.312; p < 0.001). OCT4/CD34 (KF=0.290; p < 0.001) slightly reduces the inter-observer agreement compared to H&E (KF=0.321; p < 0.001) for non-uropathologists; in contrast, OCT4/CD34 (KF=0.293; p < 0.001) significantly reduces the inter-observer agreement compared to H&E (KF=0.529; p < 0.001) for uropathologists, changing it from moderate to fair. Consensus diagnosis with H&E modified the LVI status of the original diagnosis in 8/34 (23.5 %) cases (p: 0.070), with pT re-staging in 2/34 (5.9 %) cases (p: 0.500). Consensus diagnosis with OCT4/CD34 modified the LVI status of the original diagnosis in 8/34 (23.5 %) cases (p: 0.289), with pT re-staging in 3/34 (8.8 %) cases (p: 0.250). The consensus diagnosis with OCT4/CD34 modified the consensus diagnosis with H&E in 8/34 (23.5 %) cases (p: 0.727), and these findings resulted in pT-restaging in 3/34 (8.8 %) cases (p: 0.500). The sources of disagreement among uropathologists were: H&E [artefactual clefts misinterpreted as LVI in 4/6 (66.7 %) cases and true foci of LVI misinterpreted as clusters of histiocytes within the vessels in 2/6 (33.3 %) cases], OCT4/CD34 [artefactual clefts misinterpreted as LVI in 2/8 (25 %) cases, true LVI misinterpreted as artefactual clefts in 2/8 (25 %) cases or floaters in 4/8 (50 %) cases].

CONCLUSIONS

OCT4/CD34 does not improve the inter-observer agreement for the assessment of LVI in OCT4(+) GCTT. Consensus diagnosis with H&E modifies the LVI status in a significant number of cases, resulting in changes of the pT stage in a relatively small subgroup. Consensus diagnosis with OCT4/CD34 provides little additional benefit since it cannot exclude mimickers of LVI such as floaters and artefactual clefts. These results argue against the adoption of this diagnostic tool for the routine assessment of OCT4(+) GCTT.

Cutaneous Melanomas: A Single Center Experience on the Usage of Immunohistochemistry Applied for the Diagnosis

Cutaneous melanoma (cM) is the deadliest of all primary skin cancers. Its prognosis is strongly influenced by the stage at diagnosis, with early stages having a good prognosis and being potentially treatable with surgery alone; advanced stages display a much worse prognosis, with a high rate of recurrence and metastasis. For this reason, the accurate and early diagnosis of cM is crucial-misdiagnosis may have extremely dangerous consequences for the patient and drastically reduce their chances of survival. Although the histological exam remains the "gold standard" for the diagnosis of cM, a continuously increasing number of immunohistochemical markers that could help in diagnosis, prognostic characterization, and appropriate therapeutical choices are identified every day, with some of them becoming part of routine practice. This review aims to discuss and summarize all the data related to the immunohistochemical analyses that are potentially useful for the diagnosis of cM, thus rendering it easier to appropriately applicate to routine practice. We will discuss these topics, as well as the role of these molecules in the biology of cM and potential impact on diagnosis and treatment, integrating the literature data with the experience of our surgical pathology department.

The EORTC protocol for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) reveals a high number of nodal nevi and a strong association with nevus-associated melanoma

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of nodal nevi (NN) is challenging as they mimic melanoma metastases (MM), with a detection rate mostly ranging between 1% and 11% in sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). Herein, we assessed the incidence of NN and the association with the clinical-pathological features of primary melanoma, adopting the updated European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) protocol for SLNB.

METHODS

All cases of paired melanoma and SLNB were retrospectively evaluated (April 2019-May 2020). Appropriate statistical tests were adopted, with significant variables included in the logistic regression model.

RESULTS

81 patients and a total of 186 lymph nodes (LNs) were included. Eleven patients had only NN and 4 had both NN and MM (18.5%); 29 LNs (15.6%) showed at least one NN and 12 (6.5%) showed more than one NN (a total amount of 43 NN was detected). All NN and none MM stained for p16. NN were associated with age < 60 years (p: 0.042), no ulceration (p: 0.025) and nevus-associated melanoma (NAM) (p: 0.018), with this latter being the only predictor at the logistic regression model (p: 0.022).

CONCLUSIONS

The updated EORTC protocol shows a high number of NN and highlights a strong association with NAM.

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.