Potential influence of p16 immunohistochemical staining on the diagnosis of squamous cell lesions in cervical biopsy specimens: observation from cytologic-histologic correlation.

BACKGROUND: The p16 immunohistochemical (IHC) marker has been used increasingly as an adjunct to morphologic assessment of cervical biopsies in which the differential diagnoses include high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) and its mimics. The objective of this study was to assess the potential influence of p16 IHC staining on the evaluation of cervical biopsy as observed through cytologic-histologic correlation (CHC). METHODS: Cervical biopsy samples that had cytologic diagnoses of either low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (LSIL) or HSIL and also had histologic follow-up were retrieved from the department database. CHC and the use of p16 IHC from 2 periods (group 1, 2008; group 2, 2014-2016) were compared and analyzed. RESULTS: Histology on 452 samples from patients who had prior LSIL cytology in group 1 yielded 126 benign (27.9%), 272 LSIL (60.2%), and 54 HSIL (11.9%) diagnoses. By comparison, 491 samples from the patients in group 2 yielded 106 benign (21.6%), 277 LSIL (56.4%), and 108 HSIL (22.0%) diagnoses. The difference in CHC discrepancies between the 2 groups was significant (P = .0001), mainly because of the increased diagnosis of HSIL in group 2. Although p16 IHC was not applied to any sample from group 1, it was performed on 141 of 491 samples (28.7%) from group 2. Further follow-up of patients who had histologic HSIL revealed that residual HSIL was identified significantly more often in those who did not have p16 IHC applied in the preceding cervical biopsy than in those did (P = .0004). A similar comparison was performed between 113 patients from group 1 and 152 patients from group 2 who had a prior diagnosis of HSIL cytology, and the difference was statistically insignificant. CONCLUSIONS: The use of p16 IHC on cervical biopsies in patients who had a prior cytologic diagnosis of LSIL may lead to greater detection and upgrading of HSIL, thereby compounding the discrepancy in CHC.

The role of immunohistochemical analysis in the evaluation of EML4-ALK gene rearrangement in lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Among the mutations described in non-small cell lung carcinoma is a rearrangement resulting from an inversion within chromosome 2p leading to the formation of a fusion gene, echinoderm microtubule-associated protein-like 4-anaplastic lymphoma kinase (EML4-ALK). Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) is the gold standard for the detection of ALK gene rearrangements. However, molecular methods are not readily available in all pathology laboratories. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) using an antibody directed against the EML4-ALK fusion protein provides a widely available alternative method of detection. We assessed whether IHC is a comparable and cost-effective alternative to FISH analysis for the detection of ALK gene rearrangements. DESIGN: A total of 110 non-small cell lung carcinoma cases (63 surgical/biopsy and 47 cytology specimens), previously tested for ALK gene rearrangements by FISH [7 (6.4%) positive for the rearrangement], were probed for the EML4-ALK fusion protein using a monoclonal EML4-ALK antibody, clone 5A4. Cells were considered to stain positive for ALK if >5% of cells showed cytoplasmic staining of at least grade 1 intensity (scale: 0 to 3). A cost analysis was performed using ALK IHC as a screening test. RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of the EML4-ALK IHC stain compared with ALK FISH analysis were 100% and 96%, respectively. All 7 FISH-positive cases stained positive by IHC, whereas 4 FISH-negative cases demonstrated positive staining. One of the 4 FISH-negative, IHC-positive cases harbored an EML4-ALK rearrangement by RT-PCR yielding 3 false-positive results overall. The κ agreement between IHC and FISH methods is 0.76 (substantial/excellent). The potential savings of implementing the ALK IHC as a screening method would be $10,418.21. CONCLUSIONS: Sensitivity of the EML4-ALK IHC stain is excellent (100%) but due to its suboptimal specificity, IHC cannot reliably supplant FISH analysis for the detection of ALK gene rearrangements. IHC shows promise as a screening tool to prevent unnecessary costly FISH analysis.