4.1 Article

Immunohistochemical Expression of Ionized Calcium Binding Adapter Molecule 1 in Cutaneous Histiocytic Proliferative, Neoplastic and Inflammatory Disorders of Dogs and Cats

期刊

JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE PATHOLOGY
卷 151, 期 4, 页码 347-351

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcpa.2014.07.003

关键词

histiocytic disorder; immunohistochemistry; ionized calcium-binding adapter molecule 1; monocyte/macrophage

资金

  1. National Council for Research and Development (CNPq-Brazil) [246420/2012-0]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ionized calcium-binding adapter molecule 1 (Ibal) has been used widely as a marker for microglial cells and, recently, was also recognized as a 'pan-macrophage marker', as it is expressed by all subpopulations of cells of the monocyte/macrophage lineage. To determine the specificity of Ibal as an immunohistochemical marker for canine and feline histiocytic proliferative, neoplastic and inflammatory disorders of the skin, we evaluated its expression in two types of histiocytic tumours, two non-neoplastic histiocytic proliferative conditions, one case of granulomatous dermatitis and four non-histiocytic tumours. Cells of the monocyte/macrophage lineage in all cases of canine cutaneous histiocytoma (9/9), reactive histiocytosis (9/9), histiocytic sarcomas (5/5), feline progressive dendritic cell histiocytosis (3/3) and macrophages in cutaneous mycobacteriosis (7/7) showed strong cytoplasmic expression of Ibal. Neoplastic cells of melanomas (10/10), lymphomas (7/7), mast cell tumours (7/7) and plasmacytomas (4/4) did not express Ibal. Ibal is therefore a useful marker of cells of the monocyte/macrophage lineage in canine and feline inflammatory, proliferative and neoplastic conditions and can be used to identify these cells in formalin-fixed, paraffin wax-embedded tissues. Ibal is not able to differentiate between macrophages and dendritic antigen presenting cells and expression does not allow classification of these histiocytic disorders. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据