Store
|
Contributing Editors
|
Help
|
Contact
|
Sign In
select
All
Images Only
Search
home
resources
images
handouts
videos
quizzes
boardreview
atoz
< Current issue
Dermatopathology: Practical & Conceptual January - March 2002
>
New Concept: Melanomas in Prepubescent Children: Review Comprehensively, Critique Historically, Criteria Diagnostically, and Course Biologically
Joan M. Mones, D.O.
A. Bernard Ackerman, M.D.
Abstract
Definition of “Prepubescent” and of Proven “Melanomas” for Purposes of This Treatise
Historical Perspective: Darier and A. Civatte, 1910
Historical Perspective: Coe, 1925; Pack and Anglem, 1939
Historical Perspective: Pack et al., 1947; L. Ackerman and del Regato, 1947
Historical Perspective: Pack, 1948; MacDonald, 1948
Historical Perspective: Spitz, 1948
Historical Perspective: Allen, 1949
Historical Perspective: Spitz, 1951; Pack and Scharnagel, 1951
Historical Perspective: Truax and Allen, 1953; Allen and Spitz, 1953
Historical Perspective: Becker, 1954; McWhorter and Woolner, 1954
Historical Perspective: McWhorter et al., 1954; Hendrix, 1954; Dobson, 1955
Historical Perspective: Allen, 1960
Historical Perspective: Hoagland and Hughes, 1960
Historical Perspective: Pontius and Dziabis, 1961; McGovern and Goulston, 1963
Historical Perspective: Giersten, 1964; Kopf and Andrade, 1966
Historical Perspective: Responses of Allen to Kopf and Andrade, 1966
Historical Perspective: Skov-Jensen et al., 1966; Zwaveling et al., 1966; Saksela and Rintala, 1968
Historical Perspective: Lerman et al., 1970
Historical Perspective: Trozak et al., 1975; Shanon et al., 1976
Historical Perspective: Helwig, 1975
Historical Perspective: Speculations of Helwig, 1975
Historical Perspective: Boddie, et al., 1978
Historical Perspective: Stomberg, 1979; Pratt et al., 1981
Historical Perspective: Flemming and Ruggins, 1985; Bader et al., 1985
Historical Perspective: Peters and Goellner, 1986
Historical Perspective: Moss and Briggs, 1986; Melnick et al., 1986; Chapman et al., 1987
Historical Perspective: Donner et al., 1988
Historical Perspective: Fisher et al., 1988
Historical Perspective: K. Smith et al., 1989: “Malignant Spitz’s Nevus”
Historical Perspective: Partoff et al., 1989; Roth et al., 1990
Historical Perspective: Allen, 1991
Historical Perspective: Temple et al., 1991
Historical Perspective: Crotty et al., 1992
Historical Perspective: A. H. Mehregan and D. A. Mehregan, 1993
Historical Perspective: Tate et al., 1993
Historical Perspective: Chun et al., 1993; Bartoli et al., 1994; Nitta et al., 1995
Historical Perspective: Barnhill et al., 1995
Historical Perspective: Barnhill et al., 1995: “Metastasizing Spitz’s Tumor”
Historical Perspective: Barnhill et al., 1995: “Atypical Spitz Tumor”
Historical Perspective: Lartigau et al., 1995
Historical Perspective: Whiteman et al., 1995; Handfield-Jones and N. Smith, 1996
Historical Perspective: Spatz et al., 1996; Naasan et al., 1996
Historical Perspective: Scalzo et al., 1997; Eady, 1997; Crotty, 1997; Zhu et al., 1997
Historical Perspective: Wu and Lambert, 1997; Milton et al., 1997
Historical Perspective: Spatz and Avril, 1998
Historical Perspective: Barnhill, 1998; Spatz and Barnhill, 1999
Historical Perspective: Barnhill et al., 1999
Historical Perspective: Rapini, 1999
Historical Perspective: Strojan and Lamovec, 2000; Davis, 2000; Neville et al., 2000
Historical Perspective: Kogut et al., 2000; Patterson et al., 2000; Zuckerman et al., 2001
Historical Perspective: Conti et al., 2001; Fabrizi and Massi, 2001
Summary: Major Sources of Error in Interpretation
Summary: Major Errors of Pack, Spitz, and Allen
Summary: Major errors of Helwig, K. Smith, and Barnhill
Our Experience
Clinical Appearance
Histopathologic Findings (
Figure 18
)
Histopathologic Findings (
Figure 19
)
Histopathologic Findings (
Figure 20
)
Histopathologic Findings (
Figure 21
)
Histopathologic Findings (
Figure 22
)
Histopathologic Findings (
Figure 23
)
Histopathologic Findings (
Figure 24
)
Histopathologic Findings (
Figure 25
)
Differences Histopathologically Between Melanomas in Prepubescents and in Postpubescents: Scanning Magnification
Differences Histopathologically Between Melanomas in Prepubescents and Postpubescents: Higher Magnification
Histopathologic Differential Diagnosis
Biologic Behavior
Synthesis
Purpose of This Endeavor and the Essence of the Message
Conclusions
Addendum and Caveat
Postscript
Acknowledgements
References
SEE ALSO
-
melanoma
<
Previous
|
Next
>
Historical Perspective: Helwig, 1975
In 1975, Helwig, in a lecture devoted to "Neoplasms of the skin and malignant melanoma," recounted his experience at the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP) with 23 patients, all of whom were 14 years of age and younger, who had a primary cutaneous melanoma and proven metastasis from it. Excluded from the series were melanomas associated with large congenital nevi and cellular blue nevi. One year later, Helwig published his findings by conventional microscopy and summarized them in these words:
30
"Most of the malignant melanomas examined from the 23 children had a histologic appearance similar to that seen in malignant melanomas in adults. The microscopic characteristics included variation in size and shape of the cells and nuclei, hyperchromatism, prominent nucleoli, mitotic figures, the absence of an organized pattern in relation to the stroma, and invasion of the corium. Not all of these histologic changes were observed to the same degree in every tumor, but invasion of the corium by melanoma cells was always noted. Many of the lesions showed nonorganized masses of cells whether the cells were relatively small, relatively large, or mixed in size. In the present series, junction change usually was present when the epidermis could be examined. However, in 2 specimens there was a suggestion that junction change was absent and that the tumor was primary in the corium. In 4 of the lesions, small nevus cells other than those at or near the dermal-epidermal junction were noted in the corium, suggesting the presence of a residual nevus."
Although the 23 neoplasms reported on by Helwig doubtlessly were melanomas because all of them gave rise to metastasis, they cannot be identified with surety as melanomas or be distinguished from benign juvenile melanomas on the basis solely of the histopathologic criteria offered by him in the preceding quotation. "Junction change," known also as "junctional activity" of melanocytes, was a phrase coined by Allen and invoked often by pathologists worldwide in those days, but it had no more meaning then than it does today. In short, "junction change" is as unhelpful for diagnosis and differential diagnosis of benign and malignant proliferations of melanocytes, and differential diagnosis of them, as ill-conceived descriptive phrases like "atypical melanocytic hyperplasia," "moderately severe melanocytic dysplasia," and "pagetoid melanocytic proliferation."
Helwig showed photomicrographs of only two of the 23 melanomas, namely, of Case 20 (
Fig. 7AD
) and Case 23. The primary melanoma in Case 20 was pictured at scanning magnification (his Figure 5) and at high magnification (his Figure 6) with a comment in the legend to the latter to the effect that
"multinucleated giant cells and epithelioid cells [were] surrounded by stroma and corium."
In the text, Helwig also called attention to the presence in some of these melanomas of melanocytes with spindle and/or epithelioid shapes and of melanocytes that were giant and multinucleate. This is what he said:
"In a few of the lesions, at least a substantial part of the cells were spindle and/or epithelioid in shape. The cells tended to be clustered or grouped, and giant and multinucleated epithelioid cells with 2 or more nuclei were noted (Figs. 58). Especially in the more superficial areas, the cells seemed to show a relationship with the stroma."
The metastasis to a lymph node from the primary melanoma in Case 20 consisted of large aggregations of melanoma within the parenchyma. The melanoma pictured at scanning magnification in Helwig's Figure 5 resembles very closely what he referred to as spindle and epithelioid cell nevus (benign juvenile melanoma), and the cytologic features of the constituent melanocytes as shown in his Figure 6 taken at high magnification also resemble very closely those of spindle and epithelioid cell nevus. That this neoplasm is a melanoma and not a spindle and epithelioid cell nevus became obvious by virtue of the metastasis from it to a lymph node pictured in Helwig's Figures 7 and 8. Helwig advised in a legend to his Figure 8 that the neoplastic melanocytes shown in the metastasis are
"atypical multinucleated giant cells and epithelioid cells"
like those of a spindle and epithelioid cell nevus.
View Figure
View Figure
Figs. 7AD Comment: The photomicrographs in (A) and (B) namely, Helwig's figures 5 and 7, show changes that are extremely difficult to differentiate from those of spindle and epithelioid cell nevus. That the neoplasm really is a malignant melanoma can be told by its having metastasized to a lymph node pictured in (C) and (D), that is, figures 7 and 8. A clue to the malignant melanomatous nature of the primary neoplasm is found in the dermis of his figure 5, where neoplastic melanocytes have become confluent to form a "sheet."
<
Previous
|
Next
>
This site is made possible in part by:
Copyright © Derm101.com. All Rights Reserved.