Fluorescence in situ hybridization as an ancillary method for the distinction of desmoplastic melanomas from sclerosing melanocytic nevi

Pedram Gerami, Beth Beilfuss, Zahra Haghighat, Yuaquin Fang, Suresh Jhanwar, Klaus J. Busam

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

63 Scopus citations

Abstract

The histopathologic distinction of desmoplastic melanomas from sclerosing (desmoplastic) melanocytic nevi can be difficult, especially when evaluating a partial or superficial biopsy. In the study reported herein, we applied and explored the use of a novel ancillary method, a four-probe fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) assay targeting RREB1, MYB, Cep6 and CCND1, to this diagnostic problem. Fifteen sclerosing melanocytic nevi, including desmoplastic Spitz nevi, conventional nevi with prominent stromal sclerosis and sclerotic blue nevi, as well as 15 examples of desmoplastic melanoma, were examined. None of the sclerosing melanocytic nevi showed a level of chromosomal aberrations that met FISH criteria for melanoma. Seven of the 15 desmoplastic melanomas were 'positive' (had documented chromosomal aberrations) by FISH. Thus, a positive FISH test strongly supports the diagnosis of melanoma in this context. However, in this setting a negative FISH test is of limited diagnostic value. Our findings suggest that prior reports about the high sensitivity of the FISH test for melanoma diagnosis need to be adjusted according to melanoma subtype.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)329-334
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Cutaneous Pathology
Volume38
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2011

Keywords

  • FISH
  • desmoplastic melanoma
  • nevi

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine
  • Histology
  • Dermatology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Fluorescence in situ hybridization as an ancillary method for the distinction of desmoplastic melanomas from sclerosing melanocytic nevi'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this