You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 60, Issue 4
  • Utility of immunohistochemical analysis for cyclo-oxygenase 2 in the differential diagnosis of osteoblastoma and osteosarcoma

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Original article
Utility of immunohistochemical analysis for cyclo-oxygenase 2 in the differential diagnosis of osteoblastoma and osteosarcoma
  1. Ako Hosono1,
  2. Umio Yamaguchi2,
  3. Atsushi Makimoto1,
  4. Makoto Endo2,
  5. Atsuko Watanabe1,
  6. Tadakazu Shimoda3,
  7. Mitsunori Kaya4,
  8. Tadaki Matsumura5,
  9. Hiroshi Sonobe6,
  10. Tomomi Kusumi7,
  11. Takehiko Yamaguchi5,
  12. Tadashi Hasegawa5
  1. 1Division of Paediatric Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
  2. 2Division of Orthopaedic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
  3. 3Clinical Laboratory, National Cancer Centre Hospital, Tokyo, Japan
  4. 4Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Sapporo Medical University School of Medicine, Sapporo, Japan
  5. 5Department of Surgical Pathology, Sapporo Medical University School of Medicine, Sapporo, Japan
  6. 6Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, National Hospital Organization, Fukuyama Medical Centre, Fukuyama, Japan
  7. 7Department of Pathology, Hirosaki University School of Medicine, Hirosaki, Japan
  1. Correspondence to:
    Dr T Hasegawa
    Department of Surgical Pathology, Sapporo Medical University School of Medicine, South 1, West 16, Sapporo 060-8543, Japan;hasetada{at}sapmed.ac.jp

Abstract

Aims: To study the immunoexpression of cyclo-oxygenase (COX) 2 in osteoblastomas (OBs) and osteosarcomas (OSs), and to assess the utility of immunohistochemical analysis for COX 2 in the differential diagnosis of the two tumour forms.

Methods: The immunohistochemical features of COX 2 were studied in 11 OBs and 30 OSs, including 26 high-grade OSs (16 osteoblastic, 7 chondroblastic, and 3 fibroblastic) and 4 low-grade OSs.

Results: Tumour cells from all 11 OBs unequivocally showed diffuse, intense and cytoplasmic immunoreactivity for COX 2. Strong cytoplasmic expression of COX 2 was observed in 5 of 26 (19%) high-grade OSs, all chondroblastic. In one osteoblastic-type OS, COX 2 was expressed in the chondroblastic component, but this tumour was considered to be COX 2 negative. No COX 2 expression was noted in atypical osteoblastic cells. Staining in the four low-grade OSs was negative.

Conclusion: The results of immunohistochemical analysis of COX 2 suggest that in addition to the routine histopathological evaluation, COX 2 is a valuable diagnostic marker in the distinction between OB and OS.

  • COX, cyclo-oxygenase
  • OB, osteoblastomas
  • OS, osteosarcomas

https://doi.org/10.1136/jcp.2006.038828

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Published Online First 5 July 2006

    • Competing interests: None declared.