Immunohistochemical studies on expression of human vascular smooth muscle myosin heavy chain isoforms in normal mammary glands, benign mammary disorders and mammary carcinomas

Immunohistochemistry in the Diagnosis and Classification of Breast Tumors

CONTEXT.—

In the clinical practice of breast pathology, immunohistochemistry (IHC) of different markers is widely used for the diagnosis and classification of breast lesions.

OBJECTIVE.—

To provide an overview of currently used and recently identified IHC stains that have been implemented in the field of diagnostic breast pathology.

DATA SOURCES.—

Data were obtained from literature review and clinical experience of the authors as breast pathologists.

CONCLUSIONS.—

In the current review, we summarize the common uses of IHC stains for diagnosing different types of breast lesions, especially invasive and noninvasive breast lesions, and benign and malignant spindle cell lesions. In addition, the cutting-edge knowledge of diagnostic carcinoma markers will lead us to further understand the different types of breast carcinoma and differentiate breast carcinomas from other carcinomas of similar morphology. Knowing the strengths and limitations of these markers is essential to the clinical practice of breast pathology.

Best practices in diagnostic immunohistochemistry: myoepithelial markers in breast pathology

CONTEXT

Numerous immunohistochemical stains have been shown to exhibit exclusive or preferential positivity in breast myoepithelial cells relative to their luminal/epithelial counterparts. These myoepithelial markers provide invaluable assistance in accurately classifying breast proliferations, especially in core biopsies. Although numerous myoepithelial markers are available, they differ in their sensitivity, specificity, and ease of interpretation, which may be attributed, to a large extent, to the variable immunoreactivity of these markers in stromal cells including myofibroblasts, vessels, luminal/epithelial cells, and tumor cells.

OBJECTIVE

To review commonly used myoepithelial markers in breast pathology and a selection of diagnostic scenarios where they may be useful.

DATA SOURCES

The information outlined in this review article is based on our experiences with routine cases and a review of English-language articles published between 1987 and 2008.

CONCLUSIONS

To demonstrate the presence or absence of myoepithelial cells, a panel-based approach of 2 or more markers is recommended. Markers that most effectively combine sensitivity, specificity, and ease of interpretation include smooth muscle myosin heavy chains, calponin, p75, p63, P-cadherin, basal cytokeratins, maspin, and CD10. These markers, however, display varying cross-reactivity patterns and variably reduced expression in the myoepithelial cells bordering in situ carcinomas. The choice of a myoepithelial marker should be dependent on a combination of factors, including published evidence on its diagnostic utility, its availability, performance characteristics that have been achieved in a given laboratory, and the specific diagnostic scenario. When its use is deemed necessary, immunohistochemistry for myoepithelial cells in breast pathology is most effective when conceptualized as supplemental, rather than central to routine morphologic interpretation.

The significance of focal myoepithelial cell layer disruptions in human breast tumor invasion: a paradigm shift from the "protease-centered" hypothesis

Human breast epithelium and the stroma are separated by a layer of myoepithelial (ME) cells and basement membrane, whose disruption is a prerequisite for tumor invasion. The dissolution of the basement membrane is traditionally attributed primarily to an over-production of proteolytic enzymes by the tumor or the surrounding stromal cells. The results from matrix metalloproteinase inhibitor clinical trials, however, suggest that this "protease-centered" hypothesis is inadequate to completely reflect the molecular mechanisms of tumor invasion. The causes and signs of ME cell layer disruption are currently under-explored. Our studies revealed that a subset of pre- and micro-invasive tumors contained focal disruptions in the ME cell layers. These disruptions were associated with immunohistochemical and genetic alterations in the overlying tumor cells, including the loss of estrogen receptor expression, a higher frequency of loss of heterozygosity, and a higher expression of cell cycle, angiogenesis, and invasion-related genes. Focal ME layer disruptions were also associated with a higher rate of epithelial proliferation and leukocyte infiltration. We propose the novel hypothesis that a localized death of ME cells and immunoreactions that accompany an external environmental insult or internal genetic alterations are triggering factors for ME layer disruptions, basement membrane degradation, and subsequent tumor progression and invasion.

Immunostaining patterns of myoepithelial cells in breast lesions: a comparison of CD10 and smooth muscle myosin heavy chain

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have reported CD10 expression in myoepithelial cells (MEC) of the breast, supporting its use as a marker to help distinguish invasive breast carcinoma (IC) from ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).

AIM

To compare the effectiveness of CD10 with smooth muscle myosin heavy chain (SMMHC) in the detection of MEC in benign and malignant breast lesions.

METHODS

Histological material from 25 patients with DCIS and 21 with IC were immunostained for CD10 and SMMHC. Staining was scored on a scale of 0 to 3+ (0, no staining; 3+, intense) and the staining distribution was documented as focal, partial, or circumferential.

RESULTS

Uniform, 3+ circumferential CD10 and SMMHC staining of MEC was seen in normal breast ducts and lobules, and in ducts and acini involved in sclerosing adenosis and apocrine metaplasia. In an analysis of total ducts involved by DCIS, 3+ circumferential staining was seen in 65 of 366 ducts (17.7%) stained for CD10 versus 190 of 396 ducts (48%) stained for SMMHC. MEC were not detected immunohistochemically in 116 of 366 ducts (31.7%) with anti-CD10 and 50 of 396 (12.7%) with anti-SMMHC. In contrast, all ICs were negative for both CD10 and SMMHC. Focal background staining of stromal myofibroblasts was seen with both CD10 and SMMHC, but CD10 showed a higher rate of non-specific staining of epithelial cells.

CONCLUSION

Although CD10 can aid in the distinction between IC and DCIS, SMMHC is a more sensitive and specific marker of MEC and shows less heterogeneity of immunostaining patterns.

Distribution of p63, a novel myoepithelial marker, in fine-needle aspiration biopsies of the breast: an analysis of 82 samples

BACKGROUND

The presence of myoepithelial cells (MECs) in fine-needle aspiration biopsies (FNAB) of the breast constitute an important criterion used to diagnose benign breast lesions. However, MECs sometimes have a distorted cytomorphology, and most of the previously evaluated myoepithelial markers do not have satisfactory sensitivity and specificity. p63, a recently characterized p53 homolog, is a nuclear transcription factor that is expressed in basal cells of multilayered epithelia and myoepithelial cells of the breast. The authors analyzed the immunocytochemical distribution of p63 in a series of 82 breast FNABs (30 benign lesions and 52 malignant breast lesions).

METHODS

Eighty-two archival, Papanicolaou-stained smears of breast lesions were retrieved from the files of the authors' institutions. Immunocytochemistry was performed according to the streptavidin-biotin-peroxidase complex technique using the antibody 4A4 (against all p63 isoforms). Two pathologists evaluated the distribution of p63 positive cells. Only nuclear reactivity was considered specific.

RESULTS

In benign lesions, p63 decorated the nuclei of MECs in all samples. p63 also stained naked nuclei in fibroadenomas. In malignant lesions, p63 was positive in MECs overlying malignant cell clusters in all 8 samples of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), in 9 of 16 samples of pure invasive carcinomas (IC), and in 16 of 20 samples that contained both DCIS and IC. In 18 samples (36%), a variable population of p63 positive, malignant cells was observed. p63 failed to decorate stromal, neural, adipocytic, and smooth muscle cells in all samples.

CONCLUSIONS

p63 is a reliable nuclear marker of MECs in breast aspirates. Regardless of the fact that variable proportions of p63 positive, malignant cells were observed in 36% of breast carcinoma aspirates, p63 may be a useful adjunct antibody to confirm the presence of MECs in FNABs of benign breast lesions.

Immunocytochemistry of myoepithelial cells in the salivary glands

MECs are distributed on the basal aspect of the intercalated duct and acinus of human and rat salivary glands. However, they do not occur in the acinus of rat parotid glands, and sometimes occur in the striated duct of human salivary glands. MECs, as the name implies, have structural features of both epithelial and smooth muscle cells. They contract by autonomic nervous stimulation, and are thought to assist the secretion by compressing and/or reinforcing the underlying parenchyma. MECs can be best observed by immunocytochemistry. There are three types of immunocytochemical markers of MECs in salivary glands. The first type includes smooth muscle protein markers such as alpha-SMA, SMMHC, h-caldesmon and basic calponin, and these are expressed by MECs and the mesenchymal vasculature. The second type is expressed by MECs and the duct cells and includes keratins 14, 5 and 17, alpha 1 beta 1 integrin, and metallothionein. Vimentin is the third type and, in addition to MECs, is expressed by the mesenchymal cells and some duct cells. The same three types of markers are used for studying the developing gland. Development of MECs starts after the establishment of an extensively branched system of cellular cords each of which terminates as a spherical cell mass, a terminal bud. The pluripotent stem cell generates the acinar progenitor in the terminal bud and the ductal progenitor in the cellular cord. The acinar progenitor differentiates into MECs, acinar cells and intercalated duct cells, whereas the ductal progenitor differentiates into the striated and excretory duct cells. Both in the terminal bud and in the cellular cord, the immediate precursors of all types of the epithelial cells appear to express vimentin. The first identifiable MECs are seen at the periphery of the terminal bud or the immature acinus (the direct progeny of the terminal bud) as somewhat flattened cells with a single cilium projecting toward them. They express vimentin and later alpha-SMA and basic calponin. At the next developmental stage, MECs acquire cytoplasmic microfilaments and plasmalemmal caveolae but not as much as in the mature cell. They express SMMHC and, inconsistently, K14. This protein is consistently expressed in the mature cell. K14 is expressed by duct cells, and vimentin is expressed by both mesenchymal and epithelial cells. After development, the acinar progenitor and the ductal progenitor appear to reside in the acinus/intercalated duct and the larger ducts, respectively, and to contribute to the tissue homeostasis. Under unusual conditions such as massive parenchymal destruction, the acinar progenitor contributes to the maintenance of the larger ducts that result in the occurrence of striated ducts with MECs. The acinar progenitor is the origin of salivary gland tumors containing MECs. MECs in salivary gland tumors are best identified by immunocytochemistry for alpha-SMA. There are significant numbers of cells related to luminal tumor cells in the non-luminal tumor cells that have been believed to be neoplastic MECs.

A subset of morphologically distinct mammary myoepithelial cells lacks corresponding immunophenotypic markers

INTRODUCTION

Immunostaining for smooth muscle actin (SMA) is commonly used to elucidate mammary myoepithelial (ME) cells, whose presence or absence is a reliable criterion for differentiating in situ and invasive carcinomas. However, some morphologically distinct ME cells fail to stain for SMA. This study intended to assess whether these SMA-negative cells also lack the expression of other ME cell markers.

METHODS

Hematoxylin/eosin and SMA immunostained sections from 175 breast cancer patients were examined. Three cases were found to harbor ducts that showed morphologically distinct ME cell layers, but showed no SMA immunostaining in at least one-third of the layer or the entire layer. Eight additional consecutive sections from each case were stained for SMA, using a black chromogen, and each was then re-stained for one of eight additional markers supposed to exclusively or preferentially stain ME cells, using a red chromogen. SMA-negative ME cells were re-examined for the expression of other markers.

RESULTS

SMA-negative ME cells in two cases also failed to display immunoreactivity for other markers, including calponin, CD10, smooth muscle myosin heavy chain, protease inhibitor 5 (maspin), Wilms' tumor-1, and cytokeratins 5, 14, and 17 (CK5, CK14, and CK17). However, in one case SMA-negative ME cells displayed immunoreactivities for maspin, CK5, CK14, and CK17. The distribution of these ME cells is independent of ductal size, length, and architecture.

CONCLUSIONS

A subset of morphologically identifiable ME cells lack the expression of nine corresponding immunophenotypic markers, suggesting that ME cells might also be subject to different normal and pathological alterations.

Immunohistochemical distinction of endometrial stromal sarcoma and cellular leiomyoma

Distinguishing low grade endometrial stromal sarcoma (ESS) from benign smooth muscle proliferations like cellular leiomyoma (CL) can be problematic; because of differing treatments and prognosis, this distinction is important. The authors tested the hypothesis that low grade ESS could be distinguished from CL by immunohistochemistry using a panel of antibodies that have not previously been used in this setting. Antibodies to calponin, smooth muscle myosin heavy chain (SMM-HC), the Wilms tumor gene product (WT-1), and CD10 were applied to 14 cases of ESS (10 low grade, 4 high grade) and 9 CL. Among low grade ESS, 3 of 10, 3 of 10, 9 of 10, and 10 of 10 were positive for expression of calponin, SMM-HC, WT-1, and CD10, respectively. Of CL, all 9 were positive for calponin, SMM-HC, and WT-1, whereas 3 of 9 marked with antibodies to CD10. Overall, SMM-HC and calponin were expressed strongly in CL but weakly expressed in ESS; the converse was true for CD10. Expression of WT-1 and the reticulin-staining pattern do not discriminate between these two tumors. Antibodies to SMM-HC, CD10, and calponin can reliably distinguish ESS from CL.

Obesity affects expression of progesterone receptors and node metastasis of mammary carcinomas in postmenopausal women without a family history

Possible relationships between risk factors, such as obesity and a family history of breast cancer, and prognostic factors of mammary carcinomas were investigated by examining the body mass index of patients and the expression of estrogen (ER) and progesterone receptors (PgR), c-erbB-2 and p53, grade of histology, size of tumors and nodal status of mammary carcinomas. There was no significant difference in the body mass index of premenopausal patients either with or without a family history. For postmenopausal patients, the body mass index was significantly low in patients with a family history compared with patients without a family history. In premenopausal patients with or without a family history and in postmenopausal patients with a family history, there was no significant difference in the body mass index regardless of the mammary carcinoma prognostic factor, such as expression of ER, PgR, c-erbB-2 and p53, grade of histology, size of tumors and nodal status. However, in postmenopausal patients without a family history, body mass index was significantly high for patients with mammary carcinomas that had PgR expression and node metastasis. These results suggest that obesity may affect the PgR status and nodal status of mammary carcinomas in postmenopausal patients without a family history.

Histological and biological characteristics of microinvasion in mammary carcinomas < or = 2 cm in diameter

Fifty-two mammary carcinomas, 2 cm or less in diameter, were examined in order to clarify the morphology and biology of microinvasion. The morphological characteristics of microinvasion of carcinomas include: (i) a loss of myoepithelial cells and a rupture with concomitant loss of collagen IV and laminin in the basement membrane of involved mammary glands; and (ii) budding of carcinomas from the rupture into the stroma. When microinvasion was defined as a rupture of < 200 microm in the basement membrane with invasion, the number of microinvasions per 1 mm of basement membrane was larger in the tumors in which the area of invasion was larger. The prevalence of microinvasion showed a significant correlation with lymph node metastasis and the rate of histological deviation, while no correlation of expression of either estrogen receptors or progesterone receptors and c-erbB-2 protein was found. The study clarified that the early invasion of mammary carcinomas could be detected by the immunohistochemical method using anti-smooth muscle actin, laminin and collagen IV antibodies. The study also suggested that microinvasion might be an indicator of lymph node metastasis in mammary carcinomas < or = 2 cm diameter.