Aberrant neurofilament protein and synaptophysin expression in malignant melanoma of the nasal cavity

Mimickers of neuroendocrine tumors on endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspirate material: Need for caution

Cytologic diagnosis of neuroendocrine tumors can be straightforward on cytologic preparations, given the classical neuroendocrine morphology and expression of neuroendocrine markers confirmed by immunohistochemistry. However, overreliance on neuroendocrine markers can lead to misdiagnosis even if individual cell features suggest a neuroendocrine tumor. We present three unusual cases, two of which were initially diagnosed as neuroendocrine tumors and the third one carried preliminary diagnosis of neuroendocrine tumor on endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspirates. These cases subsequently turned out to be cholangioblastic cholangiocarcinoma, metastatic melanoma, and gastric glomus tumor, respectively. We suggest approaches that could have pointed us towards the correct diagnosis at the outset and discuss potential pitfalls.

Neuroendocrine Transdifferentiation in Cutaneous Melanoma: A Case Report and Review of the Literature

ABSTRACT

Neuroendocrine transdifferentiation refers to the progressive transformation of a nonneuroendocrine tumor to the one showing evidence of neuroendocrine differentiation on morphological and immunohistochemical grounds. Although this phenomenon has been well-documented in certain malignancies, particularly prostatic adenocarcinoma after androgen deprivation, cases of neuroendocrine transdifferentiation in melanomas are exceptionally rare. Herein, we report a case of a conventional superficial spreading melanoma occurring on the skin of the leg in a young male which showed progressive neuroendocrine transdifferentiation as it progressed through 2 in-transit metastases and a nodal metastatic deposit over a 4-year period. The tumor retained the BRAF V600E mutation throughout the disease process, and disease control was achieved through dual BRAF inhibition therapy. The possibility of melanoma masquerading as a high-grade neuroendocrine malignancy when investigating tumors of unknown primary should be kept in the mind of clinicians and histopathologist alike as a potential diagnostic pitfall, thus helping avoid misdiagnosis and guide appropriate treatment strategies.

Base of tongue metastasis of cutaneous malignant melanoma with rhabdoid and neuroendocrine features: Report of a rare case and review of the literature

Metastatic malignant melanoma (MM) represents a highly aggressive cancer associated with overall poor prognosis. Various anatomic sites can be affected, including the oral cavity and the oropharynx. It may mimic other entities by assuming a variety of clinical appearances and exhibiting a plethora of microscopic variations. Herein, we present a case of a 63-year-old male with a MM metastasizing to the base of tongue, which developed 5 years after the original diagnosis and treatment of cutaneous MM of the chest and heralded its relapse; subsequently, neurological symptoms developed as a result of metastasis to the brain. Diagnostic challenges were encountered, as the tongue lesion clinically masqueraded as a pedunculated reactive lesion and microscopically displayed unusual rhabdoid and neuroendocrine features. Tumor cells expressed S-100, HMB-45, Melan-A, and SOX-10, while most cells with rhabdoid morphology were also positive for myogenin and Myo-D1. Chromogranin and synaptophysin positivity was further noticed in a subset of cells, suggestive of focal neuroendocrine differentiation. Molecular investigation revealed mutations for the BRAF V600E gene. Divergent differentiation of tumor cells may cause diagnostic pitfalls necessitating thorough immunohistochemical analysis. The presence of rhabdoid features and neuroendocrine differentiation are very uncommon, while their co-existence is extremely rare. Better characterization of such microscopic variations in MMs with evaluation of their potential biologic significance is warranted.

Malignant Melanoma With Neuroendocrine Differentiation: A Case Report and Literature Review

Background

Melanoma has a wide range of histologic variants and cytomorphologic features that make its diagnosis challenging. Melanoma can also rarely have neuroendocrine markers adding further diagnostic uncertainty particularly given that unrelated tumor types, such as prostate cancer, can also display focal neuroendocrine differentiations.

Case presentation

Our patient is a 74-year-old Caucasian man found to have a lung mass. Initial biopsy revealed typical microscopic morphology and neuroendocrine differentiation consistent with small cell carcinoma. Despite standard chemoradiation treatment, the patient continued to progress with new metastasis in the brain, liver and bone. Subsequent chest wall biopsy revealed golden-brown pigment associated with melanin. Further tumor immunohistochemistry revealed extensive neuroendocrine differentiation with CD56, synaptophysin, and INSM1, as well as strong immunoreactivity for melanocyte markers including SOX10, S100, PRAME, and MITF, consistent with metastatic melanoma with neuroendocrine differentiation. Genomic testing revealed increased tumor mutational burden and alterations in NF1, BRAF, CDKN2A/B, TERT. The patient was transitioned to checkpoint inhibitor therapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab and had resolution of his intracranial mass and decrease in size of other metastatic lesions.

Conclusion

Often the combination of anatomic findings such as a lung mass, typical microscopic morphology, and confirmation of neuroendocrine differentiation correctly identifies a patient with small cell carcinoma. However, in a patient who fails to respond to treatment, a broader immunohistochemical workup along with molecular testing with additional tissue may be warranted.

Prognostic significance of the aberrant expression of neuroendocrine markers in melanomas

Background

Melanoma is a highly malignant tumor with diverse histopathological morphology and frequent aberrant expression of immunohistochemical markers. An occasionally reported phenomenon is the abnormal expression of neuroendocrine markers. Awareness of this situation is essential because such tumors need to be differentiated from neuroendocrine tumors because of their significant therapeutic and prognostic implications.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the expression of chromogranin A (CgA), synaptophysin (Syn) and CD56 as neuroendocrine markers in 308 cases with melanomas. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression analyses were used for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) evaluation and comparison between neuroendocrine markers expression status in all melanoma cases or stage I–II cases.

Results

The expression of neuroendocrine markers in melanomas is not uncommon. CgA was positive in 6/304 (2.0%) cases, Syn in 26/304 (8.6%), and CD56 in 56/189 (29.6%). None of the cases co-expressed all the three markers. Focal or weak expression of at least one neuroendocrine marker was identified in 70/188 (37.2%) cases. The expression of CgA was correlated with age (p = 0.019), while the positive expression of Syn and CD56 showed borderline significance (p = 0.078 and 0.083, respectively), but not for any neuroendocrine marker expression. The expression of any neuroendocrine marker showed borderline significance with staging (p = 0.066). The expression of CgA, Syn, CD56, or any neuroendocrine marker did not correlate with clinicopathological features including sex, specimen type, origin, location, and histology subtype. Survival analyses revealed that the expression of neuroendocrine markers was not associated with OS or PFS.

Conclusions

Our study confirms that neuroendocrine marker expression is a common phenomenon in melanomas, but it has no prognostic significance. Nevertheless, awareness can avoid misdiagnosis in cases of melanomas with unusual morphology and immunophenotypes.

Metastatic malignant melanoma with neuroendocrine differentiation: a case report and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Metastatic neuroendocrine carcinoma often presents as carcinoma of unknown primary. Although most cases display immunohistochemical positivity for neuroendocrine markers, subsets of cases display reduced or negative expression for some of these proteins. The identification of metastatic neuroendocrine carcinomas is even more complicated by the occurrence of unrelated tumor types with focal neuroendocrine differentiation.

CASE PRESENTATION

Our patient was a 74-year-old man of Middle Eastern ethnicity. An initial biopsy of a soft tissue metastasis displayed a neuroendocrine profile indicative of a metastatic neuroendocrine carcinoma, positive for CD56 and synaptophysin, and focally for ISL LIM homeobox 1 and insulinoma-associated protein 1. The Ki-67 index was 50%. Chemotherapy was initiated, but our patient progressed. Scrapings from a pathological hip fracture 3 months later revealed focal synaptophysin immunoreactivity and widespread melanoma antigen, human melanoma black 45, and SOX10 positivity, which are indicative of metastatic malignant melanoma with focal neuroendocrine differentiation.

CONCLUSIONS

Malignant melanoma may display neuroendocrine differentiation, and the entity should be considered a rare differential diagnosis when assessing biopsies of suspected neuroendocrine carcinomas.

Sinonasal amelanotic melanoma with neuroendocrine differentiation: a diagnostic conundrum

Mucosal malignant melanoma of the head and neck (HN) is a rare and aggressive neoplasm which constitutes only 1% of all melanomas. Neuroendocrine differentiation is an extremely unusual phenomenon in mucosal melanomas, of which five cases have been reported. We report a rare case of a 63-year-old female who developed sinonasal amelanotic melanoma with immunohistochemical expression of neuroendocrine markers, presenting a diagnostic dilemma. Ultrastructural evidence of melanosomes and neurosecretory granules aided in arriving at the diagnosis. Aberrant immunoexpression of neuroendocrine markers, particularly in an amelanotic melanoma, has critical diagnostic implications, as various malignancies with undifferentiated histomorphology occur at this site, many of which stain positively with neuroendocrine markers. We discuss the differential diagnoses and recommend a high index of suspicion so as not to miss the diagnosis of mucosal melanoma at this location.

Differential expression of neurogenes among breast cancer subtypes identifies high risk patients

The nervous system is now recognized to be a relevant component of the tumor microenvironment. Receptors for neuropeptides and neurotransmitters have been identified in breast cancer. However, very little is known about the role of neurogenes in regulating breast cancer progression. Our purpose was to identify neurogenes associated with breast cancer tumorigenesis with a potential to be used as biomarker and/or targets for treatment. We used three databases of human genes: GeneGo, GeneCards and Eugenes to generate a list of 1266 relevant neurogenes. Then we used bioinformatics tools to interrogate two published breast cancer databases SAGE and MicMa (n=96) and generated a list of 7 neurogenes that are differentially express among breast cancer subtypes. The clinical potential was further investigated using the GOBO database (n=1881). We identified 6 neurogenes that are differentially expressed among breast cancer subtypes and whose expression correlates with prognosis. Histamine receptor1 (HRH1), neuropilin2 (NRP2), ephrin-B1 (EFNB1), neural growth factor receptor (NGFR) and amyloid precursor protein (APP) were differentially overexpressed in basal and HER2-enriched tumor samples and syntaxin 1A (STX1A) was overexpressed in HER2-enriched and luminal B tumors. Analysis of HRH1, NRP2, and STX1A expression using the GOBO database showed that their expression significantly correlated with a shorter overall survival (p < 0.0001) and distant metastasis-free survival (p < 0.0001). In contrast, elevated co-expression of NGFR, EFNB1 and APP was associated with longer overall (p < 0.0001) and metastasis-free survival (p < 0.0001). We propose that HRH1, NRP2, and STX1A can be used as prognostic biomarkers and therapeutic targets for basal and HER2-enriched breast cancer subtypes.

An Update on Sinonasal Round Cell Undifferentiated Tumors

The sinonasal cavities host a wide variety of undifferentiated malignancies with round cell morphology, including neoplasms of epithelial, mesenchymal, neuroectodermal, and hematolymphoid lineage. The differential diagnosis may be difficult, especially in small biopsy material, due to overlapping morphology, but their correct classification is clinically relevant. The aim of this review is to provide practical guidelines for the differential diagnosis of these malignancies, with emphasis on recently described entities and special reference to the role of ancillary techniques.

Aberrant intermediate filament and synaptophysin expression is a frequent event in malignant melanoma: an immunohistochemical study of 73 cases

Malignant melanomas are known to express vimentin, among other intermediate filaments. Though anomalous keratin expression by malignant melanoma has been reported, its frequency is not well-established and this phenomenon is not well-known. We have seen in consultation a number of malignant melanomas with anomalous expression of keratin, other intermediate filaments, or synaptophysin, and therefore studied a large group of primary and metastatic melanomas to determine the frequency of these events. About 73 cases of malignant melanoma (22 primaries and 51 metastases) from 71 patients (51 male, 20 female; mean 59 years, range 17-87 years) were retrieved from our archives. Prior diagnoses were confirmed by re-review of hematoxylin and eosin sections and relevant (e.g., S100 protein, HMB45, Melan-A, and tyrosinase) immunohistochemical studies. Available sections were immunostained for keratin (OSCAR and AE1/AE3 antibodies), desmin, neurofilament protein, glial fibrillary acidic protein, synaptophysin, and chromogranin A. Not all cases could be tested for all markers. Cases were predominantly epithelioid (48/73, 66%) or spindle cell/desmoplastic (25/73, 34%). S100 protein, Melan-A, HMB45, and tyrosinase were positive in 60/65 (92%), 34/64 (53%), 30/60 (50%), 25/48 (52%) of cases, respectively. All five S100-protein-negative cases expressed at least one of the other melanocytic markers: Melan-A (two of four, 50%), HMB45 (two of three, 67%), and tyrosinase (one of two, 50%). All cases expressed at least one melanocytic marker. Cases were positive for keratin (OSCAR, 17/61, 28%; AE1/AE3, 16/40, 40%), desmin (11/47, 24%), neurofilament protein (5/31, 16%), glial fibrillary acidic protein (3/32, 9%), and synaptophysin (10/34, 29%), typically only in a minority of cells. Chromogranin was negative (0/32, 0%). Altogether 9/73 cases (12%) showed expression of >1 intermediate filament. All S100-protein-negative melanomas showed anomalous intermediate filament expression (keratin--one case, desmin--three cases, neurofilament protein--one case). Anomalous intermediate filament or synaptophysin expression was more common in epithelioid (intermediate filament, 27/48, 56%; synaptophysin, 7/22, 32%) as compared with spindle cell/desmoplastic (intermediate filament, 8/25, 32%; synaptophysin, 3/12, 25%) melanomas. Overall, 48% (35/73) of cases showed anomalous expression of at least one intermediate filament. Anomalous expression of all intermediate filaments and synaptophysin was found in significant subsets of malignant melanoma, representing potentially serious diagnostic pitfalls. While the inclusion of consultation cases may inflate the frequency of these findings in this series, similar findings were also seen in institutional cases. Malignant melanoma showing anomalous intermediate filament and synaptophysin expression may easily be mistaken for carcinomas, rhabdomyosarcomas, and neuroendocrine tumors. Awareness of this phenomenon, careful histopathological evaluation, and an appropriate melanocytic immunohistochemical panel should facilitate the diagnosis of malignant melanoma with unusual immunophenotypes.

Current diagnostic strategies for undifferentiated tumours of the nasal cavities and paranasal sinuses

Several malignant tumours occurring in the sinonasal tract may present with an undifferentiated morphology. Overall, these lesions pose significant diagnostic difficulties for the surgical pathologist, especially in limited biopsy material, but their correct classification is becoming increasingly important for an appropriate treatment strategy. This review deals with the criteria for differential diagnosis of these neoplasms, with emphasis on recent advances in immunohistochemistry and molecular biology, as well as with previous progress in electron microscopy. Through careful microscopic examination of haematoxylin and eosin-stained sections, in the light of clinical information and imaging data, a list of differential diagnoses can be made and an appropriate panel of antibodies can be chosen to further categorize the tumour. An initial panel including cytokeratins, synaptophysin, S100 protein, desmin and CD45 may allow the classification of most lesions or may help to narrow the list of differential diagnoses. Further refinement can be obtained through second-line markers, including in-situ hybridization for Epstein-Barr virus, other neuroendocrine markers, melanocytic markers, myogenin, CD99, other lymphocyte markers, and CD138 and light chains. Finally, molecular analysis can further assist in the recognition of specific entities such as nuclear protein in testis midline carcinoma, Ewing's sarcoma/peripheral neuroectodermal tumour, alveolar rhadbomyosarcoma, and poorly differentiated synovial sarcoma.

Divergent differentiation in malignant melanomas: a review

The aim of this review was to document and discuss diagnostic problems associated with divergent differentiation ('metaplastic change') in malignant melanomas, defined as the development in these tumours of morphologically, immunohistochemically and/or ultrastructurally recognizable non-melanocytic cell or tissue components. Types of divergent differentiation reported in malignant melanoma include: fibroblastic/myofibroblastic, Schwannian and perineurial, smooth muscle, rhabdomyosarcomatous, osteocartilaginous, ganglionic and ganglioneuroblastic, neuroendocrine and probable epithelial. Divergent differentiation is certainly a rare phenomenon and, when it occurs, can be missed by unwary pathologists and lead to diagnostic uncertainty. A carefully chosen immunohistochemical panel and the input of electron microscopy can help to clarify the nature of the cellular differentiation of these tumours and lead to a correct final diagnosis. The clinical significance of such aberrations is uncertain, nor are the underlying mechanisms as yet well defined.

Malignant melanoma with neuroendocrine differentiation: clinical, histological, immunohistochemical and ultrastructural features of three cases

AIM

To document the clinical, histological, immunohistochemical and ultrastructural features of three malignant melanomas showing neuroendocrine differentiation.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Three patients, two with primary cutaneous melanoma and one with nasal mucosal melanoma, subsequently developing or simultaneously presenting with metastatic malignant melanoma, were studied by conventional histological technique, immunohistochemistry of formalin-fixed paraffin-wax embedded tissues, and electron microscopy of epoxy-resin-embedded tumour tissue. Tumours showed either small cell or conventional malignant melanoma cell morphology. One of the three primary melanocytic lesions (the nasal melanoma) exhibited neuroendocrine differentiation immunohistochemically. All three metastatic malignant melanomas showed, in varying combinations, immunohistochemical and ultrastructural evidence for neuroendocrine differentiation: they were positive for the melanocytic markers, S100 protein, HMB-45, Melan-A and tyrosinase, and the neuroendocrine markers chromogranin, synaptophysin and neurofilament protein. Ultrastructural study in two of the metastases revealed neuroendocrine granules but no lattice-bearing melanosomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The cases described are the most comprehensively investigated malignant melanomas showing neuroendocrine differentiation to date, and the first to document neuroendocrine differentiation ultrastructurally in these tumours. Malignant melanoma with neuroendocrine differentiation therefore needs to be recognized among the other, better known variants of malignant melanoma.