Identifying the source of peritoneal carcinomatosis by molecular biological method (a clinical case)
DOI: 10.32364/2618-8430-2023-6-1-31-33
K.R. Ishmuratova1,2
1Bashkir State Medical University, Ufa, Russian Federation
2Republican Clinical Oncological Dispensary, Ufa, Russian Federation
In recent decades, multiple biological markers have been discovered which demonstrate a high specificity in determining tumor phenotypes. There has been much debate on their role in differentiating the origin of metastasis. This article presents a clinical case of peritoneal carcinomatosis arising from breast carcinoma. The immunohistochemical method was used to determine the tumor phenotype. For this purpose, the markers of gastrointestinal, ovary and breast tumors were utilized, including CDX2, PAX 8, WT1, CK7, CK20, Mammaglobin, and GCDFP-15. The findings of molecular biological phenotyping confirmed the diagnosis of primary multiple malignant neoplasms with peritoneal carcinomatosis arising from breast carcinoma. More accurate identification of tumor phenotypes plays an important role in predicting the disease outcome and specifying indications for prescribing anticancer drug treatments. The described clinical case demonstrates that molecular biological phenotypin g can be used as a proving method for identifying the origin of peritoneal carcinomatosis. The development of a panel of markers for different tumor localizations will allow a reliable detection of the source of peritoneal carcinomatosis. In cases of diagnosing peritoneal carcinomatosis from tumors with an undetected primary lesion, such panel of biological markers will help to reduce the time of examination and improve the quality of medical care.
Keywords: peritoneal carcinomatosis, diagnosis, biological markers, immunohistochemistry, breast cancer, ovarian cancer, colorectal cancer, gastric cancer.
For citation: Ishmuratova K.R. Identifying the source of peritoneal carcinomatosis by molecular biological method (a clinical case). Russian Journal of Woman and Child Health. 2023;6(1):31–33 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.32364/2618-8430-2023-6-1-31-33.
About the author:
Kamilla R. Ishmuratova — postgraduate student of the Department of Oncology with courses in oncology and pathological anatomy of the Institute of Additional Professional Education, Bashkir State Medical University; 3, Lenin str., Ufa, 450008, Russian Federation; radiotherapist, Republican Clinical Oncological Dispensary, 73/1, Prospect Oktyabrya, Ufa, 450054, Russian Federation; ORCID iD 0000-0002-3342-1974.
Contact information: Kamilla R. Ishmuratova, e-mail: kamilla-93@bk.ru.
Financial Disclosure: the author has no a financial or property
interest in any material or method mentioned.
There is no conflict of interests.
Received 10.02.2023.
Revised 17.02.2023.
Accepted 22.02.2023.
2. Simón-Gracia L., Hunt H., Teesalu T. Peritoneal Carcinomatosis Targeting with Tumor Homing Peptides. Molecules. 2018;23(5):1190. DOI: 10.3390/molecules23051190.
3. Beniey M. Peritoneal Metastases from Breast Cancer: A Scoping Review Cureus. 2019;11(8):e5367. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.5367.
4. Nakagawa T., Oda G., Kikuchi A. et al. Peritoneal dissemination of breast cancer diagnosed by laparoscopy. Int Cancer Conf J. 2020 Nov 14;10(1):91–94. DOI: 10.1007/s13691-020-00456-w.
5. Fu J.X., Wang X.J., Xia M. et al. Peritoneal carcinomatosis secondary to metastatic lung cancer complicated with acute suppurative appendicitis: A case report and literature review. Medicine (Baltimore). 2022 D;101(49):e31866. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000031866.
6. Cao B., Liu Y., Yin W. et al. A Single Center, Retrospective Analysis of Prognosis in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Patients with Peritoneal Carcinomatosis. Zhongguo Fei Ai Za Zhi. 2019 Mar 20;22(3):143–150. Chinese. DOI: 10.3779/j.issn.1009-3419.2019.03.04.
7. Park J.H., Kim J.H. Pathologic differential diagnosis of metastatic carcinoma in the liver. Clin Mol Hepatol. 2019;25(1):12–20. DOI: 10.3350/cmh.2018.0067.
8. Карпова А.Е., Шабалова И.П. Значение комплексного цитологического исследования в диагностике новообразований яичника. Новости клинической цитологии России. 2021;25(2):24–30. DOI: 10.24412/1562-4943-2021-2-0004. [Karpova A.E., Shabalova I.P. The value of complex cytological examination in the diagnosis of ovarian neoplasms. Russian News of Clinical Cytology. 2021;25(2):24–30 (in Russ.)]. DOI: 10.24412/1562-4943-2021-2-0004.
9. Gokulnath P., Soriano A.A., de Cristofaro T. et al. PAX8, an Emerging Player in Ovarian Cancer. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2021;1330:95–112. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-73359-9_6.
10. Bolzacchini E., Nigro O., Inversini D. et al. Intestinal metastasis from breast cancer: Presentation, treatment and survival from a systematic literature review. World J Clin Oncol. 2021;12(5):382–392. DOI: 10.5306/wjco.v12.i5.382.
11. Hafez N.H., Shaaban H.M. Can GATA3 Immunocytochemistry be Utilized as a Reliable Diagnostic Marker for Metastatic Breast Carcinoma in Cytological Materials? A Comparative Study with Mammaglobin and GCDFP-15 Expression. Turk Patoloji Derg. 2018;34(2):143–149. DOI: 10.5146/tjpath.2017.01419.
12. Kong X., Wang Q., Li J. et al. Mammaglobin, GATA-binding protein 3 (GATA3), and epithelial growth factor receptor (EGFR) expression in different breast cancer subtypes and their clinical significance. Eur J Histochem. 2022;66(2):3315. DOI: 10.4081/ejh.2022.3315.
13. Каприн А.Д., Старинский В.В., Шахзадова А.О. Злокачественные новообразования в России в 2021 году (заболеваемость и смертность). М.: МНИОИ им. П.А. Герцена — филиал ФГБУ «НМИЦ радиологии» Минздрава России; 2022. [Kaprin A.D., Starinsky V.V., Shakhzadova A.O. Malignant neoplasms in Russia in 2021 (morbidity and mortality). M.: MNIOI im. P.A. Herzen — branch of the Federal State Budgetary Institution "NMITs Radiology" of the Ministry of Health of Russia; 2022 (in Russ.)].
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons «Attribution» 4.0 License.
