The World Health Organization criteria for diagnosing chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) are largely based on findings observed in the peripheral blood and bone marrow aspirate. A specific diagnostic role for the bone marrow biopsy has not been adequately explored. We examined whether bone marrow biopsy supplemented by immunohistochemistry may be helpful in distinguishing CMML from cases of chronic myelogenous leukemia and atypical chronic myeloid leukemia (aCML). We immunostained 25 cases of CMML with paraffin reactive antibodies which included CD68 (KP1), CD68R (PG-M1), and CD163, and compared the results with those observed in six cases of chronic myelogenous leukemia and in three cases of atypical CML. In addition, we examined whether CD34 immunohistochemistry could be useful in separating cases of CMML with less than 10% blasts (type-1) from cases of CMML with blasts accounting for 10-19% (type-2), and cases of CMML in acute transformation to acute myeloid leukemia (blastsZ20%). The presence of nodules of plasmacytoid monocytes was investigated by CD123 staining. CD42b was used to highlight abnormal megakaryocytes. Our results demonstrate significant differences between the groups. CD34 analysis allowed separating CMML type-1 from type-2 and the former from CMML in acute transformation. CD123-positive plasmacytoid monocyte nodules were found only in CMML and not in the other two disease groups. Overlap between CMML and the other two groups were observed with CD68 immunostaining. CD68R was more restricted to bone marrow macrophages and monocytes than CD68, but the differences between CMML and chronic myelogenous leukemia or atypical CML were still not significant. Although CD42b immunostaining facilitated the detection of dwarf megakaryocytes often present in CMML, the distinction between those and the small forms seen in chronic myelogenous leukemia was still problematic.

The decision whether to proceed with complete axillary node dissection based on sentinel node status is clear for patients with negative or macrometastatic disease. However, the course of action based on sentinel node micrometastasis remains controversial. We reviewed 358 cases from 6/1999 to 7/2003. All sentinel nodes were evaluated at three levels by frozen section, touch preparation, and scrape preparation. Micrometastasis was defined as tumor deposits between 0.2 and 2 mm. Size, grade, and lymphvascular invasion of the primary tumor, as well as number, status, size of metastatic disease, and presence of extranodal capsular extension of sentinel and nonsentinel nodes were recorded. Of the 358 cases, 89 had positive sentinel nodes, 29 of which represented micrometastases. Only one (3%) of the 29 cases contained a nonsentinel node with macrometastasis. In 60 of the 89 cases sentinel nodes contained macrometastases. Of these, 38 cases (63%) had metastatic tumor in nonsentinel nodes. Intraoperative consult was performed in 53 of the 89 cases with positive sentinel nodes. Only 1 of the 19 (5%) intraoperative consult cases with micrometastatic sentinel nodes had positive nonsentinel nodes, while 21 of 34 (62%) of macrometastatic sentinel nodes at intraoperative consult had tumor in nonsentinel nodes. No single variable studied discriminated between micro-vs macrometastatic disease. At intraoperative consult, macrometastatic disease was present in all three diagnostic preparations, while diagnostic material in micrometastatic sentinel nodes was usually present in only one modality. This analysis suggests that the risk of finding tumor in nonsentinel nodes differs significantly between cases with micro (3%)-vs macro (63%)-metastatic disease in sentinel nodes. This holds true for cases assessed by intraoperative consult. Considering the known morbidity of complete axillary dissection, assessments of risk vs benefit of undertaking this procedure should be performed on a case-by-case basis in patients with sentinel node micrometastases. Modern Pathology (2005) 18, 762-768, advance online publication, 11 March 2005; doi:10.1038/modpathol.3800394Keywords: axillary node dissection; breast cancer; intraoperative consult; macrometastasis; micrometastasis; nonsentinel node; sentinel node Sentinel node mapping for patients with breast cancer and clinically negative axilla has become the standard of care in many cancer centers. While it is well documented that this technique accurately predicts axillary node status in over 90% of the cases, 1-8 there are many relevant clinical decisions and surgical practices that have not been completely standardized. These include: (a) immediate complete axillary dissection based on sentinel node status at intraoperative consult vs complete axillary dissection as part of a second surgical procedure; (b) clinical value of complete axillary dissection following sentinel node micrometastasis; 9-11 (c) clinical significance of tumor deposits less than 0.2 mm in size, detected either by hematoxyli...