3.8 Article Proceedings Paper

Histochemical and immunohistochemical markers for human eccrine and apocrine sweat glands: An aid for histopathologic differentiation of sweat gland tumors

Publisher

BLACKWELL PUBLISHING INC
DOI: 10.1046/j.0022-202x.2001.00005.x

Keywords

cationic gold; dark cell granule; epidermal growth factor; HMFG-1; human milk fat globule membrane proteins; intercellular canaliculus

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Apocrine and eccrine sweat glands are distinct in function, although they are closely related to each other developmentally and morphologically. In certain sweat gland tumors, it is difficult to differentiate between eccrine or apocrine sweat glands. Therefore, this paper reviews histochemical and immunohistochemical markers to differentiate apocrine and eccrine sweat glands with the aim of better understanding the structural and functional characteristics of these sweat glands. Specific markers for apocrine sweat glands are as follows: neuraminidase sensitive anionic sites detected by cationic colloidal gold at pH 2.0, and mitochondrion-like secretory granules that have epidermal growth factor-like antigenicity. The following antibodies react with apocrine sweat glands but not with eccrine sweat glands; the antibodies raised against 70 kDa glycoprotein purified from human milk fat globule membranes, and HMFG-1 (1.10.F3) monoclonal antibody produced by immunizing mice with defatted human milk fat globule membranes. Markers for eccrine sweat glands are as follows: dark cell granules that have chondroitinase ABC sensitive anionic sites detected by cationic gold at pH 2.0 after pretreatment with EGTA, and intercellular canaliculi with high activity of alkaline phosphatase. CEA and GCDFP-15 are expressed in both eccrine and apocrine sweat glands. Anti-EMA monoclonal antibody (E29) stains both eccrine and apocrine sweat glands.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available