We have located links that may give you full text access.
Decoding Early Mycosis Fungoides: Histopathologic and Immunohistochemical Clues.
Curēus 2024 April
INTRODUCTION: Primary cutaneous lymphomas, notably mycosis fungoides (MF), present diagnostic challenges in recognizing early mycosis fungoides (eMF) due to their diverse clinical and histopathologic manifestations. The aim of our study was to use adjunctive histopathologic and immunohistochemical methods in eMF cases to make an early diagnosis and to facilitate differentiation from other dermatoses.
METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed 35 cases of eMF diagnosed at a single center. Demographic and clinicopathologic data were collected, and histopathologic features were assessed. Comparative analyses were conducted with conditions mimicking eMF, including large plaque parapsoriasis (LPP), psoriasis, and chronic dermatitis. Immunohistochemistry for T-cell markers (CD3, CD4, CD8, CD2, CD7) was performed.
RESULTS: With the scoring we applied in our study, a sensitivity of 91.43% (95% CI; 76.94% to 98.20%) and specificity of 85.71% (95% CI; 69.74% to 95.19%) for distinguishing eMF from LPP. Epidermotropism emerged as a crucial histopathologic marker, with a notable absence in most cases of cutaneous dermatitis (81.6% and 80% for CD and psoriasis, respectively) (P < 0.001). Immunohistochemistry revealed a T-helper phenotype (CD4+/CD8-) in the majority of eMF cases (78.1%), while CD4+/CD8+ and CD8+/CD4- patterns were less common (28.5% and 8.5%, respectively).
CONCLUSION: This study underscores the complexities in distinguishing eMF from inflammatory skin diseases, advocating for a comprehensive diagnostic approach.
METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed 35 cases of eMF diagnosed at a single center. Demographic and clinicopathologic data were collected, and histopathologic features were assessed. Comparative analyses were conducted with conditions mimicking eMF, including large plaque parapsoriasis (LPP), psoriasis, and chronic dermatitis. Immunohistochemistry for T-cell markers (CD3, CD4, CD8, CD2, CD7) was performed.
RESULTS: With the scoring we applied in our study, a sensitivity of 91.43% (95% CI; 76.94% to 98.20%) and specificity of 85.71% (95% CI; 69.74% to 95.19%) for distinguishing eMF from LPP. Epidermotropism emerged as a crucial histopathologic marker, with a notable absence in most cases of cutaneous dermatitis (81.6% and 80% for CD and psoriasis, respectively) (P < 0.001). Immunohistochemistry revealed a T-helper phenotype (CD4+/CD8-) in the majority of eMF cases (78.1%), while CD4+/CD8+ and CD8+/CD4- patterns were less common (28.5% and 8.5%, respectively).
CONCLUSION: This study underscores the complexities in distinguishing eMF from inflammatory skin diseases, advocating for a comprehensive diagnostic approach.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app