Ueda J, Iwata T, Takahashi M, Hoshii Y, Ishihara T
First Department of Pathology, Yamaguchi University Hospital, Yamaguchi University School of Medicine, Ube, Japan.
Pathol Int. 2001 Jun;51(6):431-9. doi: 10.1046/j.1440-1827.2001.01217.x.
In cytological preparations, reactive mesothelial cells (RMC) in serous effusions are sometimes difficult to distinguish from adenocarcinoma cells (AC). RMC and AC can be distinguished by lectin-binding patterns, but the pattern of binding of lectins to normal mesothelium is not well defined. We investigated the expression of cytoskeletal filaments, cytokeratin (CK) and vimentin (VM), and the cell surface binding pattern of 10 lectins (HPA, SBA, ABA, DSA, PNA, RCA-I, UEA-I, LTA, WGA and ConA) in the serosa of 48 adenocarcinoma specimens. We also investigated the usefulness of six lectins (HPA, SBA, RCA-I, UEA-I, LTA and WGA) in identification of RMC and AC in 16 serous effusions. DSA reactivity was significantly higher (P < 0.05) in static mesothelial cells (SMC) than in RMC. Reactivity for LTA and ConA was significantly lower (P < 0.05) in SMC than in RMC. Anti-CK and anti-VM immunoreactivity was always positive in RMC and almost negative in SMC. In serous effusions, HPA, SBA and UEA-I binding was evident in 100, 88 and 81% of AC, respectively. Little to no binding of HPA, SBA or UEA-I was detected in RMC. Our results suggest that the morphological differences between SMC and RMC are likely to be due to differences in cytoskeletal composition, with accompanying changes in cell-surface lectin-binding patterns. HPA, SBA and UEA-I are likely to be useful markers for identification of RMC and AC in cytology.
在细胞学标本中，浆液性积液中的反应性间皮细胞（RMC）有时难以与腺癌细胞（AC）区分开来。RMC和AC可通过凝集素结合模式进行区分，但凝集素与正常间皮的结合模式尚不明确。我们研究了48例腺癌标本浆膜中细胞骨架丝、细胞角蛋白（CK）和波形蛋白（VM）的表达，以及10种凝集素（HPA、SBA、ABA、DSA、PNA、RCA-I、UEA-I、LTA、WGA和ConA）的细胞表面结合模式。我们还研究了6种凝集素（HPA、SBA、RCA-I、UEA-I、LTA和WGA）在16例浆液性积液中鉴别RMC和AC的效用。DSA在静态间皮细胞（SMC）中的反应性显著高于RMC（P<0.05）。LTA和ConA在SMC中的反应性显著低于RMC（P<0.05）。抗CK和抗VM免疫反应性在RMC中始终为阳性，而在SMC中几乎为阴性。在浆液性积液中，HPA、SBA和UEA-I在AC中的结合率分别为100%、88%和81%。在RMC中几乎未检测到HPA、SBA或UEA-I的结合。我们的结果表明，SMC和RMC之间的形态学差异可能是由于细胞骨架组成的差异以及伴随的细胞表面凝集素结合模式的变化。HPA、SBA和UEA-I可能是细胞学中鉴别RMC和AC的有用标志物。
