Negative MDM2/CDK4 immunoreactivity does not fully exclude MDM2/CDK4 amplification in a subset of atypical lipomatous tumor/ well differentiated liposarcoma.
暂无分享，去创建一个
[1] A. Vargas,et al. Lessons learnt from MDM2 fluorescence in‐situ hybridisation analysis of 439 mature lipomatous lesions with an emphasis on atypical lipomatous tumour/well‐differentiated liposarcoma lacking cytological atypia , 2022 .
[2] K. Thway. What’s new in adipocytic neoplasia? , 2021, Histopathology.
[3] S. Weiss,et al. MDM2 and CDK4 Immunohistochemistry: Should It Be Used in Problematic Differentiated Lipomatous Tumors? A New Perspective , 2016, The American journal of surgical pathology.
[4] C. Fisher,et al. Diagnostic Utility of p16, CDK4, and MDM2 as an Immunohistochemical Panel in Distinguishing Well-differentiated and Dedifferentiated Liposarcomas From Other Adipocytic Tumors , 2012, The American journal of surgical pathology.
[5] J. Goldblum,et al. Can MDM2 analytical tests performed on core needle biopsy be relied upon to diagnose well-differentiated liposarcoma? , 2010, Modern Pathology.
[6] A. Hartmann,et al. Can MDM2 and CDK4 make the diagnosis of well differentiated/dedifferentiated liposarcoma? An immunohistochemical study on 129 soft tissue tumours , 2009, Journal of Clinical Pathology.
[7] Louis Guillou,et al. MDM2 and CDK4 Immunostainings Are Useful Adjuncts in Diagnosing Well-Differentiated and Dedifferentiated Liposarcoma Subtypes: A Comparative Analysis of 559 Soft Tissue Neoplasms With Genetic Data , 2005, The American journal of surgical pathology.