PMID- 38291567
OWN - NLM
STAT- Publisher
LR  - 20240131
IS  - 1538-7151 (Electronic)
IS  - 0277-1691 (Linking)
DP  - 2024 Jan 31
TI  - Evaluation of Combined p57KIP2 Immunohistochemistry and Fluorescent in situ 
      Hybridization Analysis for Hydatidiform Moles Compared with Genotyping Diagnosis.
LID - 10.1097/PGP.0000000000001000 [doi]
AB  - Immunostaining with p57KIP2 is a widely used diagnostic technique to 
      differentiate complete hydatidiform moles (CHMs) from partial hydatidiform moles 
      (PHM) and non-molar hydropic abortion. However, distinguishing between PHMs and 
      non-molar hydropic abortions using histopathology alone is often challenging. 
      This study aimed to evaluate the technical validity and additional benefits of 
      using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) in combination with p57KIP2 
      immunostaining to diagnose molar and non-molar conceptuses. The study involved 80 
      specimens, which underwent genetic diagnosis using short tandem repeat analysis, 
      including 44 androgenetic CHMs, 20 diandric monogynic PHMs, 14 biparental 
      non-molar hydropic abortions, 1 monoandric digynic triploid abortion, and 1 
      vaginal specimen of gestational trophoblastic neoplasia. Two pathologists 
      independently diagnosed the cases based on morphology and p57KIP2 immunostaining 
      while the clinical information was masked. FISH analysis was performed using 3 
      probes (CEP17, CEPX, and CEPY), which revealed that all androgenetic CHM and 
      biparental diploid non-molar hydropic abortion specimens were diploid. Among the 
      20 diandric monogynic PHM cases examined by analyzing short tandem repeat 
      polymorphisms, 18 were triploid, and the remaining 2 were diploid. These two 
      specimens were possibly androgenetic/biparental mosaics based on FISH analysis, 
      where the three-signal ratios counting 50 cells were clearly within the diploid 
      ranges. Eight of the 20 genetic PHMs and 2 of the 14 genetically confirmed 
      non-molar hydropic abortions that were falsely diagnosed based on morphology and 
      immunohistochemistry by at least 1 pathologist were correctly diagnosed as PHM 
      and non-molar hydropic abortion, respectively, by FISH analysis. However, 1 
      monoandric digynic villus was classified as triploid by FISH analysis, leading to 
      a false PHM diagnosis. In conclusion, the combination of FISH analysis with 
      p57KIP2 immunostaining helps in diagnosing molar and non-molar conceptuses in 
      numerous cases; nevertheless, exceptional cases should be considered.
CI  - Copyright (c) 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
FAU - Usui, Hirokazu
AU  - Usui H
FAU - Hoshimoto, Kazufusa
AU  - Hoshimoto K
FAU - Sato, Asuka
AU  - Sato A
FAU - Kano, Motofumi
AU  - Kano M
FAU - Fukusato, Toshio
AU  - Fukusato T
FAU - Nakatani, Yukio
AU  - Nakatani Y
FAU - Shozu, Makio
AU  - Shozu M
LA  - eng
PT  - Journal Article
DEP - 20240131
PL  - United States
TA  - Int J Gynecol Pathol
JT  - International journal of gynecological pathology : official journal of the 
      International Society of Gynecological Pathologists
JID - 8214845
SB  - IM
COIS- K.H., M.K., and T.F. are employees of Kotobiken Medical Laboratories Inc. The 
      remaining authors declare no conflict of interest.
EDAT- 2024/01/31 06:42
MHDA- 2024/01/31 06:42
CRDT- 2024/01/31 00:03
PHST- 2024/01/31 06:42 [medline]
PHST- 2024/01/31 06:42 [pubmed]
PHST- 2024/01/31 00:03 [entrez]
AID - 00004347-990000000-00130 [pii]
AID - 10.1097/PGP.0000000000001000 [doi]
PST - aheadofprint
SO  - Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2024 Jan 31. doi: 10.1097/PGP.0000000000001000.