4.6 Article

Clusterin is highly expressed in pancreatic endocrine tumours but not in solid pseudopapillary tumours

Journal

HISTOPATHOLOGY
Volume 50, Issue 3, Pages 331-337

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2559.2007.02608.x

Keywords

beta-catenin; clusterin; differential diagnosis; immunohistochemistry; pancreatic endocrine tumour; solid pseudopapillary pancreatic tumour

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims: Clusterin is a sulphated glycoprotein, implicated in many processes, including tumorigenesis. Several studies have reported its overexpression in many human neoplasms, including prostatic and pancreatic adenocarcinoma, but its expression has not been described previously in other pancreatic tumours. Our aim was to investigate the expression of clusterin by immunohistochemistry in 30 endocrine pancreatic tumours (ENTs) and 22 solid pseudopapillary tumours (SPPTs) to document its potential in differential diagnosis, and the possible correlation between this expression and clinicopathological parameters. Discussion: Cytoplasmic positivity was scored qualitatively (weak, moderate or strong immunoreactivity) and quantitatively on a four-tiered scale. The pattern of immunoreactivity (cytoplasmic, secretory or Golgi pattern) was also assessed. Except for scattered tumour cells in five cases, all SPPTs were negative, while all ENTs showed strong immunoreactivity in a variable proportion of tumour cells. Neither the reactivity score nor the pattern of immunoreactivity was correlated with tumour size, vascular permeation, perineural invasion or lymph node metastasis. Discussion: The expression of clusterin in all ENTs is of interest and could be an additional useful marker in the differential diagnosis with SPPTs. However, the lack of correlation between clusterin expression and clinicopathological parameters rules out a role as a predictive marker for endocrine tumour aggressiveness.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available