Ano de Publicação: 2011

 

AUTORIA

Hillary Elwood, Alcides Chaux, Luciana Schultz, Peter B. Illei, Dilek E. Baydar,

Athanase Billis, Rajni Sharma, Pedram Argani, Jonathan I. Epstein, and George J. Netto

 

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES Collecting duct carcinoma (CDC) is a rare and aggressive renal tumor with a tendency to

involve the renal sinus. CDC displays variable morphologic features that can overlap with those

of renal medullary carcinoma. The loss of SMARCB1/INI1 tumor suppressor gene, initially found

in pediatric malignant rhabdoid tumors of the central nervous system, kidneys, and soft tissues,

was also recently described in renal medullary carcinoma. The current immunohistochemical

study assessed SMARCB1/INI1 expression in a series of CDCs.

 

METHODS A total of 20 archival cases of CDC were used to construct a tissue microarray. Each tumor was

spotted 3-7 times; benign tissue from the same specimen was also included when available. The

immunoexpression of SMARCB1/INI1 was evaluated using BAF47, a monoclonal mouse antibody

directed against the SMARCB1/INI1 gene product. Nuclear staining was considered as

indicative of SMARCB1/INI1 expression.

 

RESULTS The complete loss of SMARCB1/INI1 expression was observed in 3 of 20 cases of CDC. Another 3

cases revealed focal and weak intensity staining. The remaining tumors showed multifocal or diffuse

SMARCB1/INI1 expression with variable staining intensity. No significant differences were found in

the clinicopathologic and outcome features regarding SMARCB1/INI1 status.

 

CONCLUSIONS The complete loss of SMARCB1/INI1 immunoexpression was found in 15% of CDC. No

differences were found between the SMARCB1/INI1 positive and negative cases regarding the

clinicopathologic and outcome features. Our results suggest that some CDC cases might be

associated with genetic alterations involving the SMARCB1/INI1 gene. In addition, SMARCB1/

INI1 immunoexpression seems to be of limited value in the differential diagnosis of CDC versus

renal medullary carcinoma, although these results require additional validation. UROLOGY 78:

474.e1– 474.e5, 2011. © 2011 Elsevier Inc.

 

BAIXAR ARTIGO (PDF)