Correlation of FISH and PRAME Immunohistochemistry in Ambiguous Superficial Cutaneous Melanocytic Proliferations

A Comparative Study Between Copy Number Alterations and PRAME Immunohistochemical Pilot Study in Challenging Melanocytic Lesions

INTRODUCTION

Diagnostic uncertainty for ambiguous lesions that fall on the spectrum between nevi and melanoma remains a significant challenge and can have consequences for patient management.

METHODS

This study aimed to compare the diagnostic utility of preferentially expressed antigen in melanoma (PRAME) immunohistochemistry to molecular testing (FISH and SNP array) in 34 diagnostically challenging melanocytic lesions and 9 non-diagnostically challenging melanomas.

RESULTS

We conclude that while PRAME immunohistochemistry demonstrates high specificity (96.2%) in diagnostically challenging melanocytic lesions, its low sensitivity (12.5%) suggests that it should not replace histopathological evaluation in rendering the final diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that PRAME may serve as a useful adjunct in the diagnostic workup, particularly due to its high negative predictive value, but should be used in conjunction with other established diagnostic modalities.

Improving diagnostic accuracy in atypical melanocytic tumors using p16 immunohistochemistry and 9p21 fluorescence in situ hybridization: analysis of 206 second opinion cases

Diagnosing atypical melanocytic tumors can be challenging without molecular characterization, necessitating simple tools to enhance diagnostic accuracy in daily practice. This study retrospectively analyzed the utility of p16 immunohistochemistry (IHC) and 9p21 fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) on 206 tumors referred for expert second opinion. The performance of p16 and 9p21 was compared to histological diagnosis (both initial and final respectively without and with p16 and 9p21 status), histological subtype, and follow-up data. Negative p16 immunolabelling detected 90% of malignant cases, while only 11% of benign tumors were p16 negative. Homozygous 9p21deletion detected 42% of malignant tumors and excluded 95% of benign ones. Heterozygous deletion showed no diagnostic value. Homozygous 9p21 deletion significantly improved diagnostic confidence (P < 0.001), leading to tumor upgrading (n = 23) or melanoma confirmation (n = 22). Among 97 patients with follow-up, 17 had adverse outcomes. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant difference in progression-free survival between groups (P = 0.64). Combining both techniques ultimately enhanced histological diagnostic confidence in daily practice. However, in cases where p16 is negative without homozygous deletion, or where histological malignancy is uncertain and p16 positive, other p16-inactivation mechanisms or molecular anomalies should be considered, necessitating further molecular investigations.

PRAME and Historical Immunohistochemical Antibodies Ki-67, P16, and HMB-45 in Ambiguous Melanocytic Tumors

ABSTRACT

Ambiguous melanocytic lesions/tumors (AMLs) can be simply described as melanocytic neoplasms that cannot be differentiated as either a melanoma or a nevus. Preferentially expressed antigen in melanoma (PRAME) is a novel antibody that can help differentiate between nevi and melanomas. However, its usefulness remains controversial in AMLs. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the importance of PRAME and diagnostic auxiliary antibodies (Ki-67, p16, HMB-45) in the diagnosis of melanocytic lesions, especially in AMLs. This study included 52 ambiguous melanocytic lesions, 40 nevi, and 40 melanomas. All immunohistochemical studies were performed automatically using the Universal Alkaline Phosphatase Red Detection Kit. Different analytic approaches were used for each antibody based on the literature. Statistically, the multinomial forward stepwise elimination logistic regression analysis was used to create a statistical model to predict the diagnosis of melanocytic lesions based on clinical, morphological, and immunohistochemical data. PRAME positivity was very strong and diffuse in the melanoma group and statistically significantly higher than that of the AML and nevus groups. There was no statistically significant difference between the nevus and AML groups. The Ki-67 proliferation index and HMB-45 staining pattern provided valuable indications for distinguishing between these 3 groups. The P16 antibody was limited in supporting the differential diagnosis. Our statistical model showed that a high mitosis count, central pagetoid spread, and PRAME positivity increased the probability of melanoma against an AML diagnosis. This study showed the advantages of evaluating the PRAME antibody together with morphological features and other immunohistochemical markers (Ki-67 and HMB-45) in the differential diagnosis of melanocytic lesions.

A Comparison of Preferentially Expressed Antigen in Melanoma Immunohistochemistry and Diagnostic Gene Expression-Profiling Assay in Challenging Melanocytic Proliferations

ABSTRACT

Most melanocytic tumors are classified as benign or malignant based on clinical morphology, histology, and immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis. A subset of more challenging cases with ambiguous features may require further evaluation with established ancillary diagnostic molecular studies, including fluorescence in situ hybridization and/or single nucleotide polymorphism array, to increase diagnostic certainty. More recently, a diagnostic gene expression-profiling (GEP) assay and an IHC stain for the detection of PRAME (PReferentially expressed Antigen in MElanoma) have been developed. The use of PRAME IHC has been validated in cases of unequivocal and ambiguous melanocytic proliferations via comparing results with fluorescence in situ hybridization and/or single nucleotide polymorphism array. A study comparing performance metrics of PRAME IHC and diagnostic GEP has not been previously published. Herein, we evaluated the use of PRAME IHC in 55 melanocytic tumors with challenging histomorphology by comparing the results with diagnostic GEP and final histomorphologic diagnosis. Intertest agreement occurred in 88% of cases. PRAME IHC supported the final diagnosis in 89% of cases with a sensitivity of 79%, specificity of 95%, and positive predictive value of 88.2%. GEP agreed with the final diagnosis in 88% of cases with a sensitivity of 65%, 97% specificity, and positively predicted melanoma in 91.7% of cases. Because the results of this study align with past publications evaluating the performance metrics of PRAME IHC, showing it to be as sensitive as and more cost effective than all other ancillary molecular tests, we propose the use of PRAME IHC as the optimal first-line diagnostic tool for ambiguous melanocytic proliferations.

Refining the application of PRAME-a useful marker in high CSD and acral melanoma subtypes

Pathologic discordance affecting patient management may approach 20% in melanocytic cases following specialist review. The diagnostic utility of PRAME has been highlighted in several studies but interpretative challenges exist including its use in severely dysplastic compound nevi showing progression to melanoma in situ, nevoid melanoma, and coexisting nevi with melanoma. We examine the PRAME status of a broad spectrum of melanocytic lesions including challenging, dysplastic nevi with severe atypia from a large Irish patient cohort. Retrospective review of the dermatopathology database was conducted to evaluate the PRAME staining characteristics of two hundred and twenty-one melanocytic lesions using a commercially available PRAME antibody (EPR20330). The proportion of nuclear labeling and intensity of staining was recorded. The sensitivity and specificity of PRAME for in situ and malignant melanocytic lesions was 77% and 100%, respectively. Virtually all of our melanoma in situ from high-cumulative sun damaged (CSD) skin (22/23) and all acral lentiginous melanoma (5/5) were PRAME positive while 80% (8/10) of our lentigo maligna melanoma showed diffuse expression. None of our benign subgroup showed diffuse immunoexpression (0/82), including thirty-seven moderate or severely dysplastic nevi. In all cases of melanoma in situ arising in association with a dysplastic compound nevus (0/10), no immunoexpression was observed in the nevic component while in five cases of melanoma in situ with coexistent, intradermal nevus immunostaining was confined to the in situ component. A total of 100% (2/2) of desmoplastic melanomas and 50% (4/8) of nodular melanomas were PRAME positive. PRAME is a sensitive and highly specific immunostain in the diagnosis of in situ and invasive melanoma and we emphasize its application in the evaluation of high CSD and acral melanoma subtypes as well as in challenging threshold cases.

Immunohistochemistry for PRAME in Dermatopathology

ABSTRACT

Preferentially expressed antigen in melanoma (PRAME) is a tumor-associated antigen first identified in a melanoma patient and found to be expressed in most melanomas as well as in variable levels in other malignant neoplasms of epithelial, mesenchymal, or hematolymphoid lineage. Detection of PRAME expression in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue is possible by immunohistochemistry (IHC) with commercially available monoclonal antibodies. In situ and invasive melanoma frequently show a diffuse pattern of nuclear PRAME immunoreactivity which contrasts with the infrequent and typically nondiffuse staining seen in nevi. In many challenging melanocytic tumors, results of PRAME IHC and other ancillary tests correlate well, but not always: The tests are not interchangeable. Most metastatic melanomas are positive for PRAME, whereas nodal nevi are not. Numerous studies on PRAME IHC have become available in the past few years with results supporting the value of PRAME IHC as an ancillary tool in the evaluation of melanocytic lesions and providing insights into limitations in sensitivity and specificity as well as possible pitfalls that need to be kept in mind by practicing pathologists.

PRAME expression in 137 primary cutaneous melanomas and comparison with 38 related metastases

Melanocytic lesions have always represented a diagnostic challenge for surgical pathologists. According to the literature, PRAME showed great promise as an immunohistochemical tool in the distinction between benign and malignant melanocytic lesions. In the present study, we retrospectively analyzed 137 thicker (Breslow > 1 mm) primary cutaneous melanomas with the aim to better understand the utility of PRAME immunohistochemistry in daily practice and also to investigate if PRAME could represent a prognostic biomarker for cutaneous melanomas. PRAME immunohistochemistry was performed in all melanomas and in the metastases with antibodies to PRAME (dilution 1:1000, clone Ab219650) on an automated immunostainer (Ventana Benchmark Ultra) using a brown chromogen (DAB). We found that melanomas (59.1%) show diffuse PRAME expression (score 4 +). 99 (72.3%) primary cutaneous melanoma had no relapse during the follow-up. Of this group of melanomas, 61/99 (61.6%) were diffusely positive for PRAME. 38 (27.7%) primary cutaneous melanoma had relapses. Of this group, 28/36 (77.7%) were diffusely positive. We did not find any statistical correlation between diffuse PRAME expression and the presence of driver mutation in BRAF gene (p = 0.927), NRAS gene (p = 0.496) or either of the two (p = 0.138). We did not find a prognostic significance of diffuse PRAME expression for relapse (p = 0.462) or survival rate (p = 0.245). The prognostic value of PRAME has been only reported in mucosal, uveal and cutaneous thin melanomas. Here, we show statistical analyses on PRAME expression for melanoma with Breslow > 1 mm based on survival rate and long-term follow-up. According to our results, PRAME is a useful immunohistochemical ancillary tool in daily practice diagnosis of melanocytic lesions.

Diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis of PRAME in distinguishing primary cutaneous melanomas from benign melanocytic lesions

PRAME is a novel immunohistochemical marker that aids the diagnosis of melanocytic lesions. Diffuse PRAME positivity suggests melanoma, whereas benign naevi are negative or only weakly positive. However, the factual diagnostic accuracy of PRAME is not well established. Moreover, some studies have suggested that the threshold of 3+/50% positive cells may be more useful in practice than the most widely used cut-off (4+/75% of positive cells). Hence, we performed a systematic review and diagnostic accuracy meta-analysis to evaluate sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios and optimal threshold for PRAME in distinguishing benign melanocytic proliferations from melanomas. Twenty-six studies were enrolled into the meta-analysis. A total of 2915 melanocytic lesions were analysed. The optimal threshold for PRAME positivity was estimated at 3.11, which translates into 3+ in practice. Sensitivity and specificity calculated from SROC at the 3+ threshold were 0.735 (0.631-0.818) and 0.915 (0.834-0.958), respectively, compared to 0.679 (0.559-0.957) and 0.957 (0.908-0.981) at the 4+ cut-off. In subgroup analysis, the spitzoid subgroup was characterised by the lowest sensitivity and diagnostic odds ratio of PRAME. Our findings indicate that PRAME immunohistochemistry may serve as an ancillary marker to support the diagnosis of melanoma. Nevertheless, the accuracy of PRAME may be lower in spitzoid neoplasms. Our meta-analysis suggests that the 3+/50% threshold might be more useful in practice than the 4+/75% cut-off, as it shows higher sensitivity with retained satisfactory specificity.

PRAME expression by immunohistochemistry and reverse transcription quantitative PCR in conjunctival melanocytic lesions-a comprehensive clinicopathologic study of 202 cases and correlation of cytogenetics with PRAME expression in challenging conjunctival melanocytic lesions

This study examined PRAME (preferentially expressed antigen in melanoma) expression by immunohistochemistry and reverse transcription quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) in 202 histologically unequivocal conjunctival melanocytic lesions: 76 nevi, 29 benign melanoses, 25 low-grade conjunctival intraepithelial melanocytic lesions (LGCMIL), 26 high-grade conjunctival melanocytic intraepithelial lesions/in-situ melanoma (HGCMIL), and 46 invasive melanomas. PRAME score 0 was seen in 96% of nevi (73/76), 96% of benign melanoses (28/29), and 88% of LGCMIL (22/25). PRAME score 4 was seen in 50% HGCMIL (13/26) and 76% invasive melanomas (35/46). PRAME score 4 had a sensitivity of 50% and specificity of 100% in differentiating between HGCMIL and benign melanosis/LGCMIL. PRAME score 4 had a sensitivity of 76% and specificity of 100% in differentiating between melanoma and nevi. Relative quantification of PRAME mRNA expression by RT-qPCR was performed on 49 cases (24%): 17 nevi, 3 benign melanoses, 5 LGCMIL, 9 HGCMIL, and 15 invasive melanomas. The analysis generated two distinct groupings with 'high' relative PRAME expression for the HGCMIL and invasive melanoma and 'low/zero' expression for nevi, benign melanosis, and LGCMIL. Thirty-three challenging conjunctival melanocytic lesions that had previous fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analysis were studied: 18 nevi, 12 melanomas in a nevus, 2 nevoid melanomas, and 1 in-situ melanoma. All nevi (100%) showed concordance between negative FISH and PRAME (scores 0-3). Four of 13 melanomas (31%; in-situ, invasive, isolated, and in association with nevus) showed concordance between positive FISH and PRAME score 4. In conclusion, PRAME score 4 has 100% specificity for the diagnosis of HGCMIL and melanoma. PRAME is limited in its sensitivity in the evaluation of challenging melanocytic lesions.

Performance of PRAME immunohistochemistry compared with that of c-Kit, c-Myc, or cyclin D1 for the diagnosis of acral melanocytic tumors

The diagnostic role of preferentially expressed antigen in melanoma (PRAME) immunohistochemistry has not been thoroughly evaluated for acral melanocytic tumors. The objective of this study was to evaluate the utility of this modality for the diagnosis of acral melanocytic tumors compared with other potential markers. Melanocytic tumors were classified as either acral nevi, challenging melanocytic tumors (superficial atypical melanocytic proliferation of uncertain significance (SAMPUS)-favor benign (SAMPUS-FB), SAMPUS-favor malignant (SAMPUS-FM)) or acral melanomas. A total of 106 acral melanocytic tumors including acral nevi (n = 32), SAMPUS-FB (n = 17), SAMPUS-FM (n = 20), and acral melanomas (n = 37) were included. Diagnostic power, assessed using an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for distinguishing acral melanomas and acral nevi, was highest for PRAME (AUC = 0.997), followed by c-Myc (AUC = 0.755), cyclin D1 (AUC = 0.652), and c-Kit (AUC = 0.573). At a PRAME expression level ≥30% as a positive test for acral melanoma, the sensitivity and specificity of this marker for discriminating acral melanoma from acral nevus were 100% and 96.9%, respectively. PRAME immunohistochemistry also discriminated SAMPUS-FM from SAMPUS-FB with a sensitivity and specificity of 90.0% and 76.5%, respectively. In conclusion, PRAME immunohistochemistry can be used effectively to distinguish between various spectra of acral melanocytic neoplasms.

Comparative Analysis of PRAME Expression in 127 Acral and Nail Melanocytic Lesions

PRAME (PReferentially expressed Antigen in MElanoma), a cancer testis antigen expressed in low levels in gonadal, endometrial, and adrenal gland tissues, has been recently considered a valuable tool in the differential diagnosis between benign and malignant melanocytic lesions. The aim of the current study is to perform PRAME immunostaining on a large series of benign and malignant acral lesions to evaluate the reproducibility of data reported in the literature and to validate PRAME as an affordable tool in the differential diagnosis between benign and malignant acral melanocytic tumors. Immunohistochemical analysis for PRAME was performed in 127 benign and malignant acral and nail melanocytic lesions. To better correlate PRAME expression with the nature (benign vs. malignant) of the lesions, we categorized PRAME tumor cells percentage positivity and intensity in a cumulative score obtained by adding the quartile of positive tumor cells (0, 1+, 2+, 3+, 4+) to PRAME expression intensity in tumor cells (0, 1+, 2+, 3+). Adopting an arbitrary PRAME expression score of < 5 versus ≥5 resulted in a correct identification of 82.5% of benign and 87.1% of malignant lesions. PRAME immunohistochemistry demonstrated good sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of acral melanocytic lesions, however, in line with the previous literature, we identified a subset of challenging cases such as acral Spitz nevi, in situ melanomas, and small, thin, invasive melanomas in which PRAME did not correlate with morphologic features. This suggests that PRAME can be a valid tool to be incorporated in a diagnostic clinicopathologic algorithm, subject to morphologic characteristics.

Immunohistochemistry for Preferentially Expressed Antigen in Melanoma in the Differential Diagnosis of Melanocytic Lesions of the Nail Apparatus

ABSTRACT

Nail unit melanocytic lesions present a unique set of diagnostic challenges because of the unfamiliarity with clinical assessment and the lack of experience with histologic examination. Because the first surgical specimen received in the pathology laboratory is typically small, sometimes suboptimal biopsy, the distinction between melanoma and its histologic mimics can be difficult. For this reason, there has been a continued interest in the development of ancillary markers that may assist in the differential diagnosis of nail unit melanocytic lesions. Upregulation of preferentially expressed antigen in melanoma (PRAME) has been reported to be a common event in melanomas, and PRAME immunohistochemistry has been shown to be helpful in evaluating various melanocytic neoplasms. In this study, we evaluated PRAME protein expression in a series of nail unit melanocytic lesions. Twenty-five nail unit melanomas (including small biopsy and amputation specimens) and 32 control benign melanocytic lesions were retrospectively retrieved. Nuclear PRAME staining was scored as percentage and intensity labeling. All melanoma cases showed the nuclear expression of PRAME, which was usually diffuse and strong. In specimens where the neoplastic cells are limited in number, the staining was restricted to the tumor cells, corresponding to the initial H&E impression. All control cases were negative for PRAME expression. PRAME expression is helpful in distinguishing between melanomas and other nail unit melanocytic lesions. This antibody also proved to be diagnostically valuable in detecting melanoma cells in small specimens with minimal disease.

PRAME immunohistochemistry as an adjunct for evaluating ambiguous melanocytic proliferation

BACKGROUND

The histopathological assessment of diagnostically ambiguous melanocytic proliferation remains one of the biggest challenges in the dermatopathology field. PRAME (Preferentially expressed Antigen in MElanoma) immunostaining has been shown highly specific for distinguishing unequivocal malignant melanocytic proliferation from benign ones. Knowledge on its utility for evaluating ambiguous melanocytic neoplasms remains limited.

METHODS

We retrieved in our institutional database all cases of diagnostically ambiguous melanocytic neoplasms from January 2016 to January 2021. Each case was subclassified into "favor benign" or "favor malignant" neoplasm using all collected data. Immunohistochemical (IHC) expression of PRAME was assessed and correlated with the final subclassification. Using a previously proposed scoring system, diffuse immunopositivity (>75% of tumor cells) was considered positive. Furthermore, for ambiguous melanocytic proliferation occurring on a pre-existing nevus, the staining was considered positive if more than 75% of the morphologically atypical neoplastic cells were labeled, excluding morphologically unambiguous benign nevocytes.

RESULTS

Fifty-five cases of ambiguous melanocytic proliferation were examined. Thirty-one cases were finally subclassified as "favor malignant" neoplasms and 24 as "favor benign" neoplasms. Thirty-one tumors showed immunopositivity for PRAME, representing respectively 8.3% and 93.5% of "favor benign" and "favor malignant" neoplasms. The specificity and sensitivity of PRAME IHC for benign/malignant distinction were respectively 91.7% and 93.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

PRAME IHC shows high sensitivity and specificity for distinguishing malignant challenging melanocytic proliferations from benign ones and could be used as an everyday tool. However, PRAME immunoreactivity should be interpreted cautiously, knowing that rare benign melanocytic neoplasms could show diffuse positivity.