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: Barnhill et al., 1995: "Metastasizing Spitz's Tumor"
Although Barnhill and colleagues considered a neoplasm that caused the death of a 15-year-old boy to be a melanoma, they regarded the neoplasms in two children, ages 2 and 7 years, who had lymph node metastases to be "metastasizing Spitz tumors." Of the "Spitz-like variant" and the "metastasizing Spitz tumors" (
Fig. 13
), Barnhill and colleagues wrote thus:
"This group of three tumors was defined by an epithelioid cell type that resembled the cells in Spitz nevi and a clinical course of metastasis including death in one case. The patients ranged in age from 2 to 15 years (median, 7 years). The one fatal melanoma developed on the neck of a 15-year-old boy. Histologically, the tumor contained a confluent mass of enlarged epithelioid cells and somewhat larger polygonal cells extending into the deep reticular dermis. . . . The morphologic appearance suggested a markedly atypical tumor with features of a Spitz nevus and a halo nevus.
Two patients developed lymph node metastases but were alive and well as of this writing on limited follow-up of 3 and 9 years, respectively, after excision of the primary tumor and lymphadenectomy. Histologically, these tumors exhibited features of Spitz's nevus but also asymmetry, deep extension, confluent nodules, prominent cellularity, diminished maturation, and some degree of cytologic atypia. . . . Cytologically, the cells in both tumors contained abundant eosinophilic cytoplasm with a ground glass appearance as noted in typical Spitz nevi. The cells also had polyangular contours and exhibited nuclei with enlarged and generally vesicular nuclei. The tumor developing on the arm of the 2-year-old female showed discohesive sheets of multinucleated giant cells, many of which were frankly bizarre in appearance. Neither lesion could be distinguished from the group of nine atypical Spitz-like tumors."
View Figure
Fig. 13 Comment: The so-called metastasizing Spitz's tumor pictured by Barnhill et al. in their figure 7 can be told to be a melanoma because of the distribution of neoplastic melanocytes in the dermis where aggregations of them vary markedly in size and shape and many of them have become confluent to form a sheet. Although most of the neoplastic melanocytes have cytologic features reminiscent of those of Spitz's nevus, namely, large nuclei, abundant cytoplasm, and polygonal shape, as well as multinucleate forms, hyperchromasia of those nuclei and the presence, too, of melanocytes with small nuclei militate against this neoplasm being a Spitz's nevus. A malignant neoplasm of melanocytes is a melanoma, and one that metastasized like that shown here will result inevitably in the death of the patient.
Despite the acknowledgment by Barnhill and collaborators of features of melanoma histopathologically and despite metastases, those coworkers maintained, nevertheless, that the diagnosis of two of the neoplasms was "atypical Spitz-like tumor." The contagion generated by the AFIP, beginning with Helwig and followed by K. Smith et al., spread as far and wide as Nagoya (Nitta et al.) and Boston (Barnhill et al.).
Barnhill et al. also described nine neoplasms that they termed "atypical tumors with characteristics of Spitz nevus" and they did that in this sentence:
"These nine cases initially were diagnosed as malignant melanoma but on review they were judged to have features insufficient for unequivocal melanomas and were considered atypical tumors with characteristics of Spitz nevus."
Although Barnhill and associates noted peculiarities in these "atypical Spitz tumors," they persisted in contending that they were not melanomas. This is what they wrote about them:
" . . . [they] tended to be somewhat larger and to show more abnormalities than ordinary Spitz nevi. In general, asymmetry, deep extension (mean tumor thickness 4.36 mm), prominent cellularity, deeply located mitoses, occasional atypical mitoses, and cytologic atypia were noted. Some also had dermal cellular nodules with rounded 'pushing' margins. Others exhibited multifocal or plexiform finger-like infiltration of the dermis or subcutis along the inferior margins of the tumors. The latter morphologic pattern suggested some degree of order or growth control rather than loss of growth control in melanoma."
<
Previous
|
Next
>
This site is made possible in part by:
Copyright © Derm101.com. All Rights Reserved.