Human myxovirus resistance protein 1 (MxA) as a useful marker in the differential diagnosis of subcutaneous lymphoma vs. lupus erythematosus profundus.

TitleHuman myxovirus resistance protein 1 (MxA) as a useful marker in the differential diagnosis of subcutaneous lymphoma vs. lupus erythematosus profundus.
Publication TypeJournal Article
Year of Publication2012
AuthorsWang X, Magro CM
JournalEur J Dermatol
Volume22
Issue5
Pagination629-33
Date Published2012 Sep-Oct
ISSN1952-4013
KeywordsBiomarkers, Diagnosis, Differential, GTP-Binding Proteins, Humans, Immunohistochemistry, Lymphocytes, Lymphoma, T-Cell, Lymphoma, T-Cell, Cutaneous, Macrophages, Myxovirus Resistance Proteins, Panniculitis, Panniculitis, Lupus Erythematosus, Skin Neoplasms
Abstract

BACKGROUND: Substantial clinicohistologic overlap exists between lupus erythematosus profundus (LEP) and lymphomas involving the subcutis, including subcutaneous panniculitis-like T-cell lymphoma (SPTCL) and primary cutaneous gamma/delta T-cell lymphoma (GDTCL). Unequivocal markers separating the entities are not established.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the usefulness of interferon alpha (INF-α)-induced protein, myxovirus resistance protein 1 (MxA), in the differential diagnosis of these entities, as studies show that the expression pattern of MxA follows the distribution of the inflammatory infiltrate in cutaneous lupus, while INF- α is not known to operate in lymphoma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: MxA immunohistochemistry was performed on skin biopsies from 5 patients with a clinical and histological diagnosis of SPTCL, 9 patients with GDTCL and 9 patients with LEP.

RESULTS: In SPTCL and GDTCL, MxA was primarily seen in macrophages and generally did not exceed 20% of the infiltrate. In contrast, a significant portion of the subcutaneous infiltrate was positive for MxA in LEP, with 50% of the infiltrate staining on average. A greater number of macrophages and lymphocytes stained with a greater intensity as well (P<0.001). Moreover, endothelial cell staining was uniquely identified in LEP but not in lymphoma.

CONCLUSION: Although specificity is not 100%, minimal staining of MxA is a predictor for SPTCL or GDTCL. Conversely, extensive staining for MxA both qualitatively and quantitatively is a feature of LEP. Endothelial staining also appears to be specific for LEP.

DOI10.1684/ejd.2012.1790
Alternate JournalEur J Dermatol
PubMed ID23026440
Related Faculty: 
Cynthia M. Magro, M.D. Xuan Wang, M.D., Ph.D.

Pathology & Laboratory Medicine 1300 York Avenue New York, NY 10065 Phone: (212) 746-6464
Surgical Pathology: (212) 746-2700