FIGURES AND TABLES
FROM:
Availability of CD10 Immunohistochemistry as a Marker of Breast Myoepithelial Cells on Paraffin Sections
Suzuko Moritani, Ryoji Kushima, Hiroyuki Sugihara, Masamichi Bamba, Tadao K Kobayashi and Takanori Hattori
BACK TO ARTICLE
FIGURE 1.
Serial sections of normal duct (A–D) and acini (E–H). Both CD10 (B, F) and SMA (C, G) were strongly and consistently positive in the myoepithelial cells. S-100 was positive in the myoepithelium of acini (H), but it was also randomly positive in the luminal epithelium and myoepithelium of the duct.
Full figure and legend (50K)
FIGURE 2.
Adenosis (A). Both CD10 (B) and SMA (C) were strongly and consistently positive in the myoepithelial cells of proliferated tubules.
Full figure and legend (73K)
FIGURE 3.
Intraductal papilloma (A, D). Both CD10 (B) and SMA (C) were strongly positive in the myoepithelial cells. CD10 also highlighted the silhouette of myoepithelium in the infarcted area (E), where SMA was negative (F). Meanwhile, SMA was positive in the vessels and myoepithelium of atrophic tubules in the sclerotic area (F), where CD10 was negative (E).
Full figure and legend (43K)
FIGURE 4.
Ductal carcinoma in situ (A). Both CD10 (B) and SMA (C) highlighted myoepithelium of cancerized lobules. Intracystic papillary carcinoma (D). Fibrovascular core was negative for CD10 (E), whereas SMA was positive in the delicate vascular network (F). Vascular staining beneath the neoplastic epithelium could be confused with myoepithelium (F).
Full figure and legend (47K)
FIGURE 5.
Invasive ductal carcinoma (A). CD10 (B) was positive only in myoepithelial cells of a few nonneoplastic glands entrapped in the tumor. Meanwhile, background staining of SMA (C) occasionally encircled the neoplastic cell nests.
Full figure and legend (62K)
