Abstract

Objective: It was the aim of this study to determine the utility of PAX2 and PAX8 in cytology effusions with metastatic tumor. Study Design: PAX2 and PAX8 immunohistochemical staining was performed on cell blocks of 89 pleural, pericardial and peritoneal effusions with benign diagnoses (18 cases), or secondary to renal cell carcinoma (RCC; 9 cases), müllerian carcinoma (21 cases) or non-müllerian carcinoma (41 cases). Results: PAX2 stained 0% (0/18) of controls, 100% (8/8) of RCCs, 35% (7/20) of müllerian carcinomas, and 2% (1/41) of non-müllerian carcinomas. PAX8 stained 6% (1/18) of control cases, 100% (9/9) of RCC cases, 100% (20/20) of müllerian carcinomas, and 5% (2/41) of non-müllerian carcinomas. PAX2 was 35% sensitive and 95% specific for müllerian carcinoma and 100% sensitive and 95% specific for RCC. PAX8 was 100% sensitive and 95% specific for müllerian carcinoma and 100% sensitive and 95% specific for RCC. Conclusions: PAX8 is more sensitive than PAX2 for metastatic effusions from müllerian carcinomas (100 vs. 35%), while also having a higher intensity of staining than PAX2. However, PAX2 and PAX8 are both highly sensitive and specific for RCCs. PAX2 and PAX8 are valuable diagnostic markers for metastatic müllerian carcinomas and RCCs in effusion cytology. PAX8 is superior for carcinomas of müllerian origin.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)60-66
Number of pages7
JournalActa Cytologica
Volume58
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2014

Keywords

  • Carcinomas of müllerian origin
  • Effusion
  • Metastasis
  • PAX2
  • PAX8
  • Renal cell carcinoma

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine
  • Histology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'PAX2 and PAX8: Useful markers for metastatic effusions'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this