The diagnostic value of immunohistochemistry in the typing of renal tumors with eosinophylic cytoplasma

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorKucuk, S.
dc.contributor.authorAkpolat, N.
dc.date.accessioned2024-08-04T20:48:55Z
dc.date.available2024-08-04T20:48:55Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.departmentİnönü Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractAIM: In this study, we aimed to review the diagnostic approach to eosinophilic cell renal neoplasms by light microscopy and immunohistochemical techniques. METHOD: In this study 23 of these tumors were eosinophilic variant classic RCC, 15 eosinophilic variant papillary RCC, 13 eosinophilic variant chromophobe RCC and 13 oncocytoma cases. These tumors were immunohistochemically treated with CK7, CD117, EpCAM, Vimentin, RCCm (Renal cell carcinoma marker) and GST-alpha. RESULTS: In our study, contrary to the general literature on Vimentin, 65.2 % negativity was found in our patients with eosinophilic variant classic RCC. However, when compared with other tumor types in our study, vimentin expression was highest in eosinophilic variant classical RCC with 34.8 %. Statistically; RCCm, GST-alpha, EpCAM, CD117, CK7 were found to be significantly associated with tumor types, while no significant relationship was found between Vimentin and tumor types. RCCm positivity and CK7 and CD117 negativity were in favour of eosinophilic variant classical RCC, EpCAM, CK7 and CD117 positivity and Vimentin, GST-alpha and RCCm negativity supported eosinophilic variant chromophobe RCC, CK7 and RCCm positivity and CD117 and GST-alpha negativity were found in favour of eosinophilic variant papillary RCC. CD117 positivity and Vimentin, CK7 and GST-alpha negativity were found to support oncocytoma. CONCLUSIONS: The panel with RCCm, GST-alpha, EpCAM, CD117, CK7 will contribute to the differentiation of eosinophilic cytoplasm renal tumors that cannot be determined by morphological findings and to reach the correct diagnosis (Tab. 3, Fig. 4, Ref. 54). Text in PDF www.elis.sken_US
dc.identifier.doi10.4149/BLL_2020_111
dc.identifier.endpage669en_US
dc.identifier.issn0006-9248
dc.identifier.issn1336-0345
dc.identifier.issue9en_US
dc.identifier.pmid32990015en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85090977032en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ3en_US
dc.identifier.startpage663en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.4149/BLL_2020_111
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11616/99538
dc.identifier.volume121en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000571576000008en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ3en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMeden_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherComenius Univen_US
dc.relation.ispartofBratislava Medical Journal-Bratislavske Lekarske Listyen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectRCCen_US
dc.subjectoncocytomaen_US
dc.subjectimmunohistochemistryen_US
dc.titleThe diagnostic value of immunohistochemistry in the typing of renal tumors with eosinophylic cytoplasmaen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayın Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu