4.3 Article

Differential expression of MUC1, MUC2, and MUC5AC in carcinomas of various sites

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PATHOLOGY
Volume 122, Issue 1, Pages 61-69

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1309/9R6673QEC06D86Y4

Keywords

mucin; MUC1; MUC2; MUC5AC; carcinomas; immunohistochemistry

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Me studied immunohistochemical expression of MUC1, MUC2, and MUC5AC in 194 carcinomas of different primary sites to determine whether differential expression patterns could be used to distinguish different carcinomas. MUC1 was expressed by most (except adrenocortical and hepatocellular carcinomas). MUC2 was expressed infrequently (positive immunoreactivity primarily in tumors of gastrointestinal origin). MUC5AC was expressed by most pancreatic ductal cued endocervical adenocarcinomas and a variable number of tumors of the gastrointestinal tract. A MUCl+/MUC2-/MUC5AC- immunophenotype was observed in Most breast, lung, kidney bladder, endometrial, and ovarian carcinomas; MUCl+/MUC2/MUC5AC+ was characteristic of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas and cholangiocarcinomas. Adrenocortical and hepatocellular carcinomas were negative,for all mucins. Carcinomas of gastrointestinal origin exhibited variable expression of each mucin examined and no consistent immunoreactivity pattern. Many carcinomas can exhibit distinct MUCl, MUC2, and MUC5AC expression patterns, which might be valuable diagnostically in specific settings (eg, distinguishing cholangiocarcinoma front. hepatocellular carcinoma or renal from. adrenocortical carcinoma). However; the overlapping and heterogeneous patterns of MUCl, MUC2, and MUC5AC expression. observed in many tumors, particularly those of gastrointestinal origin,. preclude use of these markers in. the routine immunohistochemical assessment of carcinomas of an unknown primary site. (C) American Society for Clinical Pathology.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available