Lysozyme Expression Can be Useful to Distinguish Mammary Analog Secretory Carcinoma from Acinic Cell Carcinoma of Salivary Glands.

Lysozyme is an enzymatic marker of acinar and intercalated duct cells of normal salivary glands. The aim of this study was to verify whether lysozyme expression could be useful to distinguish acinic cell carcinoma (ACC) from its main mimic, mammary analog secretory carcinoma (MASC). For comparison, DOG1 expression was analyzed as well. Seventeen cases of ACC, 15 MASC, and 125 other salivary tumors were studied. Lysozyme expression was found in tumor cells as well as in secreted material of MASC (86.6 % of cases) and in ductal cells of epithelial-myoepithelial carcinoma (EMC-53.8 %), pleomorphic adenoma (PA-29.1 %) and polymorphous low-grade adenocarcinoma (PLGA-23.8 %). However, in ACC, lysozyme was not expressed. Three patterns of DOG1 staining were seen: apical-luminal, cytoplasmic, and mixed cytoplasmic/membranous. The apical-luminal pattern was detected in ductal cells of ACC (58.8 % of cases), EMC (38.4 %), adenoid-cystic carcinoma (AdCC-35.3 %), PA (8.3 %), and PLGA (4.8 %). These tumors also showed mixed membranous/cytoplasmic staining for DOG1. MASC, mucoepidermoid, and salivary duct carcinomas exhibited only DOG1 cytoplasmic staining. In conclusion, lysozyme cannot be used as a marker of acinar differentiation in salivary tumors. However, lysozyme expression can be helpful to distinguish MASC from ACC due to its high frequency in the former and absence in ACC. It is likely that in MASC, lysozyme expression may reflect a lactational-like secretory differentiation since lysozyme belongs to breast milk proteins. Regarding DOG1 expression, the apical-luminal pattern is related to acinar and intercalated duct differentiation whereas the cytoplasmic staining does not seem to be associated with a specific cellular phenotype.

Immunohistochemical expression of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) in oral nevi and melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) catalyses the conversion of arachidonic acid to prostaglandin, and its overexpression has been demonstrated in different malignant tumors, including cutaneous melanoma. However, no data about the expression of this protein in oral melanocytic lesions are available to date. The aim of this study was to evaluate the immunohistochemical expression of COX-2 in oral nevi and melanomas, comparing the results with correspondent cutaneous lesions. METHODS: COX-2 was evaluated by immunohistochemistry in 49 oral melanocytic lesions, including 36 intramucosal nevi and 13 primary oral melanomas, and in four cutaneous nevi and eight melanomas. RESULTS: All cases of oral and cutaneous melanomas were positive for COX-2. On the other hand, all oral and cutaneous melanocytic nevi were negative. CONCLUSION: COX-2 is highly positive in oral melanomas and negative in oral nevi and might represent a useful marker to distinguish melanocytic lesions of the oral cavity.