Medical Molecular Morphology

, Volume 39, Issue 1, pp 8–13 | Cite as

New trends of immunohistochemistry for making differential diagnosis of breast lesions

  • Takuya Moriya
  • Atsuko Kasajima
  • Kazuyuki Ishida
  • Yoshiyuki Kariya
  • Jun-ichi Akahira
  • Mareyuki Endoh
  • Mika Watanabe
  • Hironobu Sasano
SPECIAL REVIEW SERIES: Clinical morphology of breast cancer


Immunohistochemistry is widely used for pathological diagnosis of breast lesions. Other than hormone receptors and HER2/neu analysis for primary breast carcinomas, several markers may be useful for differential diagnoses, although in limited situations. To decide the malignant potential of intraductal proliferative lesions, analysis for the staining pattern of cytokeratins may be a good reference. Most ductal carcinoma in situ cases are diffusely positive for luminal cell markers (CK8, CK18, CK19), but negative for basal cell markers (CK5/6 and CK14). However, usual ductal hyperplasia may show the mosaic staining patterns for any of these markers, which may indicate a heterogeneous cell population in benign lesions. Myoepithelial markers (α-SMA, myosin, calponin, p63, CD10) are almost consistently positive for benign papillomas but they do not completely distinguish intraductal papillary carcinomas. Preservation of myoepithelial layer is the diagnostic key when looking at benign sclerosing lesions, including carcinoma with pseudoinvasive structures. E-cadherin is mostly positive for ductal carcinomas but negative for lobular carcinomas. Some of the lobular carcinomas are positive for 34βE12, but they are consistently negative for CK5/6. Comparison with histopathological findings of hematoxylin and eosin is essential to make proper diagnosis in the individual case.

Key words

Breast Immunohistochemistry Myoepithelial cell Basal cell Cytokeratin 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Umemura, S, Itoh, H, Ohta, M, Suzuki, Y, Kubota, M, Tokuda, Y, Tajima, T, Osamura, RY 2003Immunohistochemical evaluation of hormone receptor for routine practice of breast cancer. Highly sensitive procedures significantly contribute to the correlation with biochemical assaysAppl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol11272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kurosumi, M 2003Significance of immunohistochemical assessment of steroid hormone receptor status for breast cancer patientsBreast Cancer1097104PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tsuda, H, Tani, Y, Hasegawa, T, Fukutomi, T 2001Concordance in judgments among c-erbB-2 (HER2/neu) overexpression detected by two immunohistochemical tests and gene amplification detected by Southern blot hybridization in breast carcinomaPathol Int512632CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tavassoli, FA, Schnitt, SJ, Hoefler, H, Boecker, W, Rosai, J, Heywang-Kobrunner, SH, Holland, R, Monifar, F, Ellis, IO, Lakhani, SR 2003Inrtraductal proliferative lesionTavassoli, FADevilee, P eds. Tumours of the breast and female genital organs. Pathology and genetics. World Health Organization classification of tumoursIARC PressLyon6373Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Moriya, T, Kasami, M, Akiyama, F, Ichihara, S, Kurosumi, M, Tsuda, H, Umemura, S, Akashi-Tanaka, S, Imamura, H, Iwase, H, Shin, E, Harada, Y, Mitsuyama, S, Ohuchi, N 2000A proposal for the histopathological diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breastBreast Cancer7321325PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fitzgibbons, PL, Page, DL, Weaver, D, Thor, AD, Allred, DC, Clark, GM, Ruby, SG, O'Malley, F, Simpson, JF, Connolley, JL, Hayes, DF, Edge, SB, Litcher, A, Schnitt, SJ 2000Prognostic factors in breast cancer: College of American Pathologists Consensus Statement 1999Arch Pathol Lab Med124966978PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rosai, J 1991Borderline epithelial lesions of the breastAm J Surg Pathol15209221PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Moriya, T, Hirakawa, H, Suzuki, T, Sasano, H, Ohuchi, N 2004Ductal carcinoma in situ and related lesions of the breast: recent advances in pathology practiceBreast Cancer11325333PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Azzopardi, JG 1979Papilloma and papillary carcinomaAzzopardi, JG eds. Problems in breast pathologySaundersLondon150166Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    MacGrogan, G, Monifar, F, Raju, U 2003Intraductal papillary neoplasmsTavassoli, FADevilee, P eds. Tumours of the breast and female genital organs. Pathology and genetics. World Health Organization classification of tumoursIARC PressLyon7680Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hill, CB, Yeh, IT 2005Myoepithelial cell staining patterns of papillary breast lesions: from intraductal papillomas to invasive papillary carcinomasAm J Clin Pathol1233644CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ribeiro-Silva, A, Zambelli Ramalho, LN, Britto Galcia, S, Zucoloto, S 2003The relationship between p63 and p53 expression in normal and neoplastic breast tissueArch Pathol Lab Med127336340PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Werling, EW, Hwang, H, Yaziji, H, Gown, AM 2003Immunohistochemical distinction of invasive from noninvasive breast lesions. A comparative study of p63 versus calponin and smooth muscle myosin heavy chainAm J Surg Pathol278290PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Moritani, S, Kushima, R, Sugihara, H, Bamba, M, Kobayashi, TK, Hattori, T 2002Availability of CD10 immunohistochemistry as a marker of breast myoepithelial cells on paraffin sectionsMod Pathol15397405CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Funahashi, H, Koshikawa, T, Ichihara, S, Ohike, E, Katoh, K 1998Different distributions of immunoreactive S100-alpha and S100-beta protein expression in human breast cancerJ Surg Oncol682529CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Moinfar, F, Man, YG, Lininger, RA, Bodian, C, Tavassoli, FA 1999Use of keratin 34betaE12 as an adjunct in the diagnosis of mammary intraepithelial neoplasia-ductal type – benign and malignant intraductal proliferationsAm J Surg Pathol2310481058CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tan, PH, Aw, MY, Yip, G, Bay, BH, Sii, LH, Murugaya, S, Tse, GM 2005Cytokeratins in papillary lesions of the breast. Is there a role in distinguishing intraductal papilloma from papillary ductal carcinoma in situ?Am J Surg Pathol29625632PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Boecker, W, Moll, R, Dervan, P, Buerger, H, Poremba, C, Diallo, RI, Herbst, H, Schmidt, A, Lench, MM, Buchwalow, IB 2002Usual ductal hyperplasia of the breast is a committed stem (progenitor) cell lesion distinct from atypical ductal hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in situJ Pathol198458467CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Moriya, T, Suzuki, T, Endoh, M, Watanabe, M, Sasano, H 2004Cytokeratin immunohistochemistry for benign and malignant ductal proliferative lesions of the breastPathol Int54A48Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Abd El-Rehim, DM, Pinder, SE, Paish, CE, Bell, J, Blamey, RW, Robertson, JF, Nicholson, RI, Ellis, IO 2004Expression of luminal and basal cytokeratins in human breast carcinomaJ Pathol203661671CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Laakso, M, Loman, N, Borg, A, Isola, J 2005Cytokeratin 5/14-positive breast cancer: true basal phenotype confined to BRCA1 tumorsMod Pathol1813211328CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lacroix-Triki, M, Mery, E, Voigt, JJ, Istier, L, Rochaix, P 2003Value of cytokeratin 5/6 immunostaining using D5/16 B4 antibody in the spectrum of proliferative intraepithelial lesions of the breastA comparative study with 34betaE12 antibody Virchows Arch442548554Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Maluf, HM, Koerner, FC 1995Solid papillary carcinoma of the breast. A form of intraductal carcinoma with endocrine differentiation frequently associated with mucinous carcinomaAm J Surg Pathol1912371244PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tsang, WY, Chan, JK 1996Endocrine ductal carcinoma in situ (E-DCIS) of the breast. A form of low-grade DCIS with distinctive clinicopathologic and biologic characteristicsAm J Surg Pathol20921943PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kanbayashi, C, Oka, K, Hakozaki, H, Sato, H, Sando, N, Tobita, T, Koyamatsu, S, Moriya, T, Mori, N 2001Solid papillary carcinoma of the breast. Report of two casesUltrastruct Pathol25147152PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tan, PH, Lui, CG, Chiang, G, Yap, WM, Poh, WT, Bay, BH 2004Ductal carcinoma in situ with spindle cells. A potential diagnostic pitfall in the evaluation of breast lesionsHistopathology (Oxf)45343335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tamai, M 1992Intraductal growth of malignant mammary myoepitheliomaAm J Surg Pathol1611161125PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hill, CB, Yeh, IT 2005Myoepithelial cell staining patterns of papillary breast lesions: from intraductal papillomas to invasive papillary carcinomasAm J Clin Pathol1233644CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Adu-Kesse, R, Shousha, S 2004Myoepithelial markers are expressed in at least 29% of oestrogen receptor negative invasive breast carcinomaMod Pathol17626652Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kusama, R, Takayama, F, Tsuchiya, S 2005MRI of the breast: comparison of MRI signals and histological characteristics of the same slicesMed Mol Morphol38204215CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tsuchiya, S, Li, F 2005Electron microscopic findings for diagnosis of breast lesionsMed Mol Morphol38216224CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lehr, HA, Folpe, A, Yaziji, H 2000Cytokeratin 8 immunostaining pattern and E-cadherin expression distinguish lobular from ductal breast carcinomaAm J Clin Pathol114190196PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Palacios, J, Sarrio, D, Garcia-Macias, MC, Bryant, B, Sobel, ME, Merino, MJ 2003Frequent E-cadherin gene inactivation by loss of heterozygosity in pleomorphic lobular carcinoma of the breastMod Pathol16674678CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Reis-Filho, JS, Simpson, PT, Jones, C, Steele, D, Mackay, A, Iravani, M, Fenwick, K, Valgeirsson, H, Lambros, M, Ashworth, A, Palacios, J, Schmitt, F, Lakhani, SR 2005Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma of the breast. Role of comprehensive molecular pathology in characterization of an entityJ Pathol207117PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yoshida, R, Kimura, N, Harada, Y, Ohuchi, N 2001The loss of E-cadherin, alpha- and beta-catenin expression is associated with metastasis and poor prognosis in invasive breast cancerInt J Oncol18513520PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Rakha, EA, Abd El Rehim, D, Pinder, SE, Lewis, SA, Ellis, IO 2005E-cadherin expression in invasive non-lobular carcinoma of the breast and its prognostic significanceHistopathology (Oxf)46685693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Mastracci, TL, Tjan, S, Bane, AL, O'Malley, FP, Andrulis, IL 2005E-cadherin alterations in atypical lobular hyperplasia and lobular carcinoma in situ of the breastMod Pathol18741751CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Goldstain, NS, Kestin, LL, Vicini, FA 2001Clinicopathologic implications of E-cadherin reactivity in patients with lobular carcinoma in situ of the breastCancer (Phila)92738747Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wheeler, DT, Tai, LH, Bratthauer, GL, Waldner, DL, Tavassoli, FA 2004Tubulolobular carcinoma of the breast. An analysis of 27 cases of a tumor with a hybrid morphology and immunoprofileAm J Surg Pathol2815871593PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bratthauer, GL, Moinfar, F, Stamatakos, MD, Mezzetti, TP, Shekitka, KM, Man, YG, Tavassoli, FA 2002Combined E-cadherin and high molecular weight cytokeratin immunoprofile differentiates lobular, ductal, and hybrid mammary intraepithelial neoplasiasHum Pathol33620627CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Japanese Society for Clinical Molecular Morphology 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Takuya Moriya
    • 1
  • Atsuko Kasajima
    • 1
  • Kazuyuki Ishida
    • 1
  • Yoshiyuki Kariya
    • 1
  • Jun-ichi Akahira
    • 1
  • Mareyuki Endoh
    • 1
  • Mika Watanabe
    • 1
  • Hironobu Sasano
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PathologyTohoku University HospitalSendaiJapan

Personalised recommendations