Proliferative activity in craniopharyngiomas: clinicopathological correlations in adults and children.

BACKGROUND: Craniopharyngiomas are slow-growing, locally invasive intracranial tumors that can generate considerable morbidity, and recurrences are often difficult to manage. Because reliable morphologic criteria for accurately predicting the clinical outcome of these tumors are lacking, we evaluated the growth potential of craniopharyngiomas by measuring their proliferative activity based on MIB-1 immunostaining for the Ki-67 antigen, which is expressed during all phases of the cell cycle except G(0.) METHODS: Paraffin sections from 37 cases of craniopharyngiomas were immunostained with the monoclonal antibody MIB-1, and a labeling index was derived in each case from an the with the highest labeling. RESULTS: MIB-1 immunoreactivity was mainly confined to the peripheral palisaded epithelium of craniopharyngiomas. In adult craniopharyngiomas, MIB-1 labeling indices (MIB-LI) varied from 0.1% to 34.6% (mean 8.9%; SD 9. 8), and in pediatric tumors the indices ranged from 1.8% to 15.0% (mean 6.3%; SD 3.7). MIB-LI was not found to be an independent predictor of recurrence, although in all the pediatric cases that recurred, MIB-LI in the second specimen was greater. CONCLUSIONS: The actively proliferating compartment in craniopharyngiomas seems to be the peripheral palisaded epithelium. Low MIB-LI observed in the majority of tumors is in concordance with the slow growth and low-grade invasiveness associated with craniopharyngiomas. However, unlike other intracranial neoplasms, where Ki-67 labeling indices have been useful in predicting tumor behavior, a clear relationship could not be demonstrated between MIB-1 immunoreactivity, morphological features and clinical outcomes in adults or children with craniopharyngiomas.

What do technologists expect of pathologists?

The results of an informal survey that explored technologists' expectations of pathologists are examined in this article. The poll served as the basis of the author's presentation at a CAP seminar titled "Effective Laboratory Communications," held at a past CAP/ASCP Spring Meeting.