Next Article in Journal
Untargeted Metabolomics Identifies Biomarkers for MCADD Neonates in Dried Blood Spots
Next Article in Special Issue
Hepatic Global Transcriptomic Profiles of Holstein Cows According to Parity Reveal Age-Related Changes in Early Lactation
Previous Article in Journal
The Endogenous Dual Retinoid Receptor Agonist Alitretinoin Exhibits Immunoregulatory Functions on Antigen-Presenting Cells
Previous Article in Special Issue
HLA-G and Recurrent Pregnancy Loss
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJMS
Volume 24
Issue 11
10.3390/ijms24119656
ijms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Diagnostic Utility of TSSC3 and RB1 Immunohistochemistry in Hydatidiform Mole

by
Wai Kit Chia
1,2,
Pik Yuen Chia
3,
Nor Haslinda Abdul Aziz
4,
Salwati Shuib
1,2,
Muaatamarulain Mustangin
1,
Yoke Kqueen Cheah
5,6,
Teck Yee Khong
7,
Yin Ping Wong
1,2,* and
Geok Chin Tan
1,2,*
1
Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bandar Tun Razak 56000, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
2
Department of Diagnostic Laboratory Services, Hospital Canselor Tuanku Muhriz, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bandar Tun Razak 56000, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
3
Department of Pathology, Hospital Umum Sarawak, Kuching 93586, Sarawak, Malaysia
4
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bandar Tun Razak 56000, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
5
Department of Biomedical Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang 43400, Selangor, Malaysia
6
UPM-MAKNA Cancer Research Laboratory, Institute of Bioscience, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang 43400, Selangor, Malaysia
7
Department of Pathology, Women’s and Children’s Hospital, Adelaide, SA 5006, Australia
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24(11), 9656; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24119656
Submission received: 2 May 2023 / Revised: 30 May 2023 / Accepted: 31 May 2023 / Published: 2 June 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Reproductive Immunology and Pregnancy 3.0)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The general notion of complete hydatidiform moles is that most of them consist entirely of paternal DNA; hence, they do not express p57, a paternally imprinted gene. This forms the basis for the diagnosis of hydatidiform moles. There are about 38 paternally imprinted genes. The aim of this study is to determine whether other paternally imprinted genes could also assist in the diagnostic approach of hydatidiform moles. This study comprised of 29 complete moles, 15 partial moles and 17 non-molar abortuses. Immunohistochemical study using the antibodies of paternal-imprinted (RB1, TSSC3 and DOG1) and maternal-imprinted (DNMT1 and GATA3) genes were performed. The antibodies’ immunoreactivity was evaluated on various placental cell types, namely cytotrophoblasts, syncytiotrophoblasts, villous stromal cells, extravillous intermediate trophoblasts and decidual cells. TSSC3 and RB1 expression were observed in all cases of partial moles and non-molar abortuses. In contrast, their expression in complete moles was identified in 31% (TSSC3) and 10.3% (RB1), respectively (p < 0.0001). DOG1 was consistently negative in all cell types in all cases. The expressions of maternally imprinted genes were seen in all cases, except for one case of complete mole where GATA3 was negative. Both TSSC3 and RB1 could serve as a useful adjunct to p57 for the discrimination of complete moles from partial moles and non-molar abortuses, especially in laboratories that lack comprehensive molecular service and in cases where p57 staining is equivocal.

1. Introduction

Hydatidiform moles (HM) develop as a result of an abnormal fertilisation of a defective ovum. It is one of the gestational trophoblastic diseases that comprises a group of benign and malignant tumours. There is a distinct geographical distribution of HMs. Estimates from studies across the world suggest the incidence of HMs is higher in Asian countries (0.81–4.4 per 1000 live births) compared to Western countries (0.66–1.21 per 1000 live births) [1,2,3,4]. Interestingly, this observation is also in individuals with Asian heritage who live in Western countries [2]. The reported incidence of HMs was highest in the South-East Asia countries, Indonesia, India and Turkey, with incidence ranging from 2 to 12 per 1000 live births [3]. The incidence of HMs in Malaysia was reported as 2.6 per 1000 live births [4]. In contrast, countries in Europe, North America and Oceania have the lowest incidence of HMs in the world, at 0.66 to 1.21 per 1000 live births [1].
HMs are subdivided into complete mole (CM) and partial mole (PM), based on the combination of histomorphology and genetic evaluations [5]. The differentiation between CMs and PMs is clinically important as it could forecast the likelihood of a recurrence and the risk of developing persistent trophoblastic disease and choriocarcinoma [6]. Most laboratories lack molecular service; hence, they depend solely on histomorphology evaluation for HM diagnosis, which is a challenge to the pathologists. The characteristic histological features of HMs are trophoblast hyperplasia and hydropic degeneration of chorionic villi. However, in particular at the earlier stage of the disease, HMs may not have the classic morphological features [7]. Moreover, CMs and PMs may exhibit substantial overlap in histological characteristics, with significant interobserver variability between practising pathologists [8]. Certain non-molar abortuses (NMA) may also display hydropic alterations which resemble the histomorphology of HMs, further complicating the diagnosis [9].
A CM results from the fertilisation of an ovum devoid of maternal DNA by one or two sperms, leading to a diploid conception consisting entirely of paternal DNA [10]. Rarely, as a result of autosomal recessive mutation, a diploid biparental complete mole may occur. In contrast, a PM is typically the consequence of a dispermic conception with a haploid oocyte and two sperms, resulting in a triploid conceptus. This knowledge forms the basis for the diagnosis of HM, using p57 immunohistochemistry, a paternally imprinted and maternally expressed gene, to distinguish between CM and PM [11,12,13]. The p57 immunohistochemistry is widely acceptable as an ancillary test to aid in the pathological diagnosis of HM. The absence of maternal DNA in CMs typically results in complete loss of p57 expression in the hydropic villi. In contrast, a PM expresses p57 antibody as it contains both paternal and maternal genes [14]. Notably, p57 is unable to differentiate between PM (diandric monogynic triploidy) and non-molar abortus (NMA) (biparental diploidy) specimens because both of them contain maternal DNA [15].
The excess of paternally derived DNA in HMs leads to improper expression of imprinted genes, which results in the overgrowth of trophoblastic cells and defective embryonic development [16,17]. There are approximately 123 imprinted genes in humans, of which 38 are paternally imprinted genes and expressed by the maternal allele (Table S1) [18]. The cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 1C (CDKN1C) gene, which encodes the p57 protein, is one of them [8]. The CDKN1C gene, which is paternally imprinted and can be found on human chromosome 11p15.5, is mainly expressed from the maternal allele in most tissues [19].
Paternally imprinted genes are those that are expressed only when inherited from the mother, while the father’s allele is silenced by DNA methylation [20]. This is known as genomic imprinting, and it has a parent-of-origin-specific effect on gene expression [21]. Paternally imprinted genes play an important role in foetal growth and development, particularly in placental development and nutrient transfer to the developing embryo. Developmental disorders and cancer can result from abnormalities in their expression [22]. Abnormal expression of paternally imprinted genes in HMs can lead to abnormal proliferation of trophoblast cells and the formation of this disease [23]. Therefore, disruptions in the normal regulation of paternally imprinted genes, especially those of paternal origin, can lead to significant implications for pregnancy outcomes and maternal health [24].
The aim of this study is to answer whether other paternally imprinted genes could also assist in the diagnostic approach in HMs. Thus, we have selected some of the paternal-imprinted (RB1, TSSC3 and DOG1) and maternal-imprinted (DNMT1 and GATA3) genes and performed immunohistochemical study to determine their expression in CMs, PMs and NMAs.

2. Results

2.1. Demographic and Clinical Characteristics

The 61 cases in this study were categorised into 29 CMs (p57-/diploid), 15 PMs (p57+/triploid) and 17 NMAs (p57+/diploid), based on the histomorphology findings, fluorescence in-situ hybridisation DNA ploidy study and p57 immunohistochemistry analysis (Figure 1). Table 1 provides information on the demographic and clinical characteristics of the three groups of patients. The mean age of the CM group was 34.9 years, while that of the PM and NMA groups were 31.3 years and 33.7 years, respectively. The distribution of age among the three groups showed that the majority of the patients in the CM and PM groups were in the age range of 20–39 years, while the majority of the patients in the NMA group were 40 years old and above. The difference in the age distribution among the three groups is not statistically significant (p = 0.4567).
As for ethnicity, the majority of the patients in all three groups were Malay, with 79.3%, 100% and 88.2% in the CM, PM and NMA groups, respectively. A small proportion of patients in the CM (10.3%) and NMA (11.8%) groups were Chinese, and 10.3% in the CM were of other ethnicities (Punjabi and Caucasian), while none of the patients in the PM group belonged to other ethnicities. The mean gestational age in the CM group was 10.6 weeks, while that in the PM and NMA groups were 13.2 weeks and 10.6 weeks, respectively. The difference in gestational age between the CM and PM groups is statistically significant (p = 0.0247). The mean β-hCG levels in the CM, PM and NMA groups were 234,024, 102,174 and 10,124 mIU/mL, respectively. The mean β-hCG levels in the CM was higher than those in the PM, and the difference is statistically significant (p = 0.0227).

2.2. Immunohistochemical Study of Paternal- and Maternal-Imprinted Genes

2.2.1. Paternally Imprinted Genes

TSSC3 Immunohistochemistry

Tumour-suppressing STF cDNA 3 (TSSC3) (also known as Pleckstrin homology-like domain family A member 2/PHLDA2) was expressed in the cytoplasm of cytotrophoblasts (CT) of all cases of PMs (15/15, 100%) and NMAs (17/17, 100%). In contrast, only 31.0% (9/29) of the CMs were positive for TSSC3 (Figure 2). Six of the nine positive cases showed staining of weak intensity. The difference in TSSC3 expression in CMs compared to PMs and NMAs is statistically significant (p < 0.0001). The villous stromal cells (VSC) were mostly negative for TCCS3, except for two cases of PMs. Syncytiotrophoblasts (ST) were consistently negative for TSSC3 in all categories. The decidual cells (DC) were mostly positive, i.e., 23/24 (95.8%), 12/15 (80%) and 12/15 (80%), in CMs, PMs and NMAs, respectively. On the other hand, the intermediate trophoblasts (IT) were predominantly negative; TSSC3 expression was observed in 2/29 (6.9%), 5/15 (33.3%) and 4/16 (25%) in CMs, PMs and NMAs, respectively. TSSC3 was not expressed in the nuclei of all types of cells in the placenta. Table 2 shows the distribution of protein expression of paternal- and maternal-imprinted genes in different types of placental cells in CMs, PMs and NMAs.

RB1 Immunohistochemistry

RB transcriptional corepressor 1 (RB1) expression was observed in the nuclear of CTs, VSCs, ITs and DCs (Figure 2). None of the STs showed RB1 staining. In CTs, RB1 was positive in 3 of the 29 cases of CMs (10.3%). In contrast, RB1 was positive in all cases of PMs (15/15, 100%) and NMAs (16/17, 94.1%). The difference in RB1 expression in CMs compared to PMs and NMAs is statistically significant (p < 0.0001). In VSCs, only one case from the CM group was positive with moderate intensity staining, while all cases in the PM and NMA groups were negative. ITs were consistently negative for RB1 staining. The DCs in the majority of cases were positive for RB1, 88% (22/25), 86.7% (13/15) and 92.9% (13/14), in CMs, PMs and NMAs, respectively.

DOG1 Immunohistochemistry

We performed a preliminary staining on 12 cases of each group (CM, PM and NMA) and delay of germination 1 (DOG1) was consistently negative in all cell types in the placenta (Figure 2).

2.2.2. Maternally Imprinted Genes

DNMT1 Immunohistochemistry

DNA methyltransferase 1 (DNMT1) was expressed in the nuclei of CTs in all cases of CMs, PMs and NMAs (Figure 2). It showed variable staining in other cell types in the placenta. The majority of ITs were positive for DNMT1, i.e., 93.1% (27/29), 93.3% (14/15) and 76.8% (13/17) of cases of CMs, PMs and NMAs, respectively. It was positive in 41.4% (12/29), 33.3% (5/15) and 11.8% (2/17) of the VSCs in CMs, PMs and NMAs, respectively. In STs, DNMT1 was positive in 51.7% (15/29), 40% (6/15) and 41.2% (7/17) of cases of CMs, PMs and NMAs, respectively. In DCs, it was positive in 56.5% (13/23), 53.3% (8/15) and 61.5% (8/13) of cases of CMs, PMs and NMAs, respectively. There is no statistically significant difference in DNMT1 expression in all types of placental cells between CMs and PMs (p > 0.5) (Table 3).

GATA3 Immunohistochemistry

GATA binding protein 3 (GATA3) was expressed in the nuclei of all CTs and STs in all three groups, except for one case of CM where the staining was negative (Figure 2). There is no statistically significant difference between the three groups (p = 1.0). GATA3 was consistently positive in all ITs. In contrast, it was negative in VSCs of all three groups. In STs, GATA3 was positive in almost all cases in the three groups, except for two cases of CMs where the staining was negative. The DCs showed variable staining, i.e., 4.2% (1/24), 53.3% (8/15) and 13.3% (2/15) in CMs, PMs and NMAs. The difference in GATA3 staining in DCs between CMs and PMs is statistically significant (p = 0.0008).

2.3. TSSC3 and RB1 Immunohistochemistry in Equivocal Cases

We were unable to ascertain the diagnosis of four cases in this study by histomorphology alone. However, after the utility of p57 immunohistochemistry and DNA ploidy study, we categorised two of them (PM002 and PM019) as non-molar abortus and one as partial mole (PM009) (Table 4). PM003 was uncertain as p57 staining was only 50% (equivocal), and it was diploid by FISH analysis. The addition of a positive TSSC3 immunohistochemistry implied that it is likely a case of non-molar abortus, with rare exception of a diploid biparental CM and retention of maternal DNA. While in the other three cases, TSSC3 and RB1 reinforced the diagnosis.

3. Discussion

Our study found about a quarter of the subjects with CM were >40 years old. In contrast, none of the subjects with PM was >40 years old. Previous studies reported HM occurrence has a bimodal distribution with subjects <20 years and >40 years old [19,25,26]. Women after the age of 35 years old have a 5–10 times higher risk for developing HM [27]. Women with a history of previous molar pregnancy have a 10 times higher risk than sporadic cases in developing HMs [28].
The β-hCG level in the CM group was at the average range of about 200,000 mIU/mL, while the PM group was at about 100,000 mIU/mL. This finding is similar to our previous study [11]. Although the level of β-hCG in the PM group was higher than NMA (about 10,000 mIU/mL), the level was still within the range of normal pregnancy [29]. Nonetheless, raised serum β-hCG should be interpreted with caution as it can be elevated in β-hCG-secreting tumours, and a low level of β-hCG may be due to infarcted HM [30].
There are substantial overlapping histomorphological features in distinguishing CM from PM, which could potentially lead to misdiagnosis and subsequent inappropriate clinical management [8]. Our previous study reported that the diagnostic accuracy of histomorphology alone was 78.4% for CMs and 70.6% for PMs [5]. Notably, the diagnosis based on histomorphology is subjected to inter- and intra-observer variabilities, resulting in suboptimal diagnostic accuracy and reproducibility [19].
The use of ancillary techniques like immunohistochemistry, FISH, karyotyping, flow cytometry or genotyping had been shown to improve the diagnostic accuracy of HMs [5,19,31,32]. P57, a paternally imprinted maternally expressed gene, is currently a widely used immunohistochemistry method in the diagnosis of HMs. As, generally, CMs do not have maternal genetic material, p57 expression is expected to be negative in CMs. On the contrary, p57 should be positive in villous cytotrophoblasts of biparental conceptus like PMs and NMAs [11,31]. Meanwhile, most CMs are diploid, and most PMs are diandric triploid with two paternal and one maternal genome [32]. Therefore, DNA ploidy study can also assist in the differentiation between CMs and PMs. All the cases in our study have been separated into three groups, i.e., CM (p57-/diploid), PM (p57+/triploid) and NMA (p57+/diploid) using a combination of p57 immunohistochemistry and DNA ploidy study by FISH.
Genomic or parental imprinting is an epigenetic modification of the genome in the gametes that causes an imbalanced expression of maternal versus paternal alleles in the offspring. Studies have shown about half of them control tissue growth [33]. There are about 38 known paternally imprinted maternally expressed genes. We were curious whether there are other paternally imprinted genes that could act similarly to p57 in the diagnosis of HMs. Based on the parental conflict theory, the paternally imprinted maternally expressed genes are essential for embryonic development, while the maternally imprinted paternally expressed genes are essential for placental development. [34]. A study using animal models with deficient maternally or paternally imprinted genes resulted in a larger or smaller conceptus [35].
TSSC3 is located in chromosome 11p15.5 that contains several other well-studied imprinted genes, including H19, IGF2, ASCL2 and p57 [36]. This gene was the first apoptosis-related gene that was shown to be imprinted [37], and it has been established to regulate placental growth [38,39]. The placenta is an organ with high amounts of the TSSC3 gene, and it persists throughout gestation in the human placenta [40]. Salas et al. (2004) reported that loss of TSSC3 resulted in placentomegaly, while its overexpression led to stunted placental growth [33].
We found about 69% of the CMs were negative for TSSC3 in the villous cytotrophoblasts. In contrast, all PMs and NMAs expressed TSSC3. Studies by Thaker et al. (2004), Kato et al. (2005) and Saxena et al. (2003) showed complete loss of TSSC3 expression in all cases of CMs [36,40,41]. Intriguingly, nine cases of CMs in our study were positive for TSSC3, of which the majority (6/9, 66.7%) had weak staining intensity (Table S2). Fisher et al. (2004) demonstrated that a retention of a maternal copy of chromosome 11, which encodes for both p57 and TSSC3, may occur [26]. P57 (CDKN1C, size 2559) and TSSC3 (PHLDA2, size 1448) are located close to each other in chromosome 11. Therefore, co-retention of these two genes might happen. McConnell et al. (2009) also described an example of androgenetic diploidy CM with retained maternal copies of chromosomes 6 and 11, with abnormal p57 expression [16]. We postulated that some DNA of maternal origin may be retained in CMs; hence, the positive expression of TSSC3 in some of our cases. Further studies are needed to ascertain this finding.
The human retinoblastoma gene (RB1) is located at chromosome 13q14.2. It was the first cloned tumour suppressor gene to be expressed preferentially from the maternal allele [42,43]. RB1 functions as a negative regulator of the cell cycle, to maintain a balance between cell growth and development by binding to transcription factors and regulating the expression of genes involved in cell proliferation and differentiation. The role of RB1 includes the regulation of cell cycle, cell senescence, growth arrest, apoptosis and differentiation [44]. We found only 3 of the 29 cases (10.3%) of CMs was positive for RB1, as compared to PMs and NMAs, where all cases expressed strong immunopositivity. The p57 gene is responsible for encoding a cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor that functions upstream of the RB1 protein [45]. As both p57 and RB1 are involved in the same cell cycle pathway, this suggests maternal suppression of cell proliferation may have been subject to evolutionary selection [42,43].
We performed a preliminary staining of DOG1 in 12 cases of each category and found no immunoreactivity in all placenta cells. This finding is consistent with previous observation that DOG1 was not found in the placenta, thymus, tonsil, testis and postmenopausal ovarian tissues [46]. DOG1 immunopositivity was observed in the adult gastrointestinal tract, salivary glands, pancreatic acini, intrahepatic bile ducts, gallbladder glandular elements, breast myoepithelial cells and prostatic basal cells [47].
GATA3 and DNMT1 are maternally imprinted, paternally expressed genes, and both of them showed variable positivity in all samples, except for GATA3 in VSCs, where it was negative. Studies reported GATA3 was frequently expressed in trophoblastic tumours such as choriocarcinoma, placental site trophoblastic tumour, epithelioid trophoblastic tumour and hydatidiform mole [48,49]. DNMT1 is involved in supporting fetoplacental growth [50,51].

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Formalin-Fixed Paraffin-Embedded Hydatidiform Mole Tissue Samples

This is a cross-sectional study comprising a total of 61 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue sections diagnosed as hydatidiform mole and hydropic abortus (29 cases of CMs, 15 PMs and 17 NMAs), collected between the year 2015 and 2021. The diagnosis of all cases was confirmed based on histological examination, p57 immunohistochemistry and fluorescence in-situ hybridisation DNA ploidy study [5]. The haematoxylin and eosin-stained slides were reviewed by pathologists (G.C.T and Y.P.W.), and one FFPE tissue block that was most representative of the lesion was selected for immunohistochemical study. The tissue blocks were retrieved from the archive of the Department of Pathology. Ethics approval was granted by our institutional human ethics committee (approval code: JEP-2019-820).

4.2. DNA Ploidy Study by Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization

FISH was performed on formalin-fixed paraffin embedded tissue sections using the Dako Histology FISH Accessory Kit (Glostrup, Denmark) according to the manufacturer’s protocol. Tissue sections (4 m) were baked at 62 °C for 15 min before being deparaffinized in xylene and rehydrated in a series of ethanol dilutions. The sections were then pretreated in Pre-Treatment Solution, protein digested with Pepsin Solution for 30 min at 37 °C, and digestion adequacy was determined using 4′,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) [52]. For each case, two sets of probes were used: CytoCell® Satellite Enumeration Probes (Cambridge, UK) for (a) chromosome 11 (green) and 16 (red), and (b) chromosome X (green) and Y (red). Sections were then denatured for 5 min at 76 °C before being incubated overnight at 37 °C in a ThermoBrite FISH Slide Processing System (Leica Biosystems, Richmond, IL, USA). Following the washing and rinsing steps with Stringent Wash Buffer, 6 µL of DAPI was applied to each section and cover-slipped. A fluorescence microscope was used to examine all of the slides. A total of 250 cells were counted from five chorionic villi (50 cells from each), and the ploidy status was determined as diploid or triploid if more than 10% of nuclei showed two or three signals, respectively.

4.3. Immunohistochemistry of Paternally and Maternally Imprinted Genes

Antibodies of four paternal-imprinted genes (p57, RB1, TSSC3, DOG1) and two maternal-imprinted genes (DNMT1 and GATA3) were selected to perform the immunohistochemical study on CMs, PMs and NMAs. All immunohistochemistry studies were conducted using the EnVisionTM FLEX Mini Kit, High pH (Dako, Denmark), following the manufacturer’s guides and recommendations. In general, the FFPE tissue sections were sectioned at 4 μm in thickness and mounted on poly-L-lysine coated glass slides and subsequently baked at 62 °C overnight. The tissue sections were deparaffinised and rehydrated before performing antigen retrieval with target retrieval solution, citrate pH 6.0 and pH 9.0 (Dako, Denmark) for TSSC3 and the other antibodies, respectively, in the Decloaking Chamber™ NxGen (Biocare Medical, Pacheco, CA, USA) for 30 min at 110 °C. Next, they were treated with peroxidase-blocking reagent (Dako, Denmark) for 10 min to block endogenous peroxidase activity. All sections were incubated with the primary antibodies along with their respective positive controls and dilution factors, as listed in Table 5. Lastly, the slides were incubated with EnVisionTM FLEX HRP (Dako, Denmark), followed by 3,3′-diaminobenzidine-containing chromogenic (DAB) stain and haematoxylin counterstain, before mounted with coverslips and DPX mounting medium.
Immunoexpression analyses of all the immunostained sections were independently examined by two pathologists (G.C.T and Y.P.W) blinded from the original diagnosis. The immunoreactivity of antibodies was assessed on the following cell types in the placenta, i.e., cytotrophoblasts, syncytiotrophoblasts, villous stromal cells, intermediate trophoblasts and decidual cells. The nuclear immunoreactivity for DNMT1 and GATA3 antibodies and cytoplasmic immunoreactivity for TSSC3 and DOG1 antibodies of any intensities detected in ≥10% of cells were considered as positive. For RB1, staining of <50% in the nuclei of cytotrophoblasts was considered as negative, while staining of ≥50% was considered as positive.

4.4. Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was carried out using GraphPad Prism (version 8.4.0 for MacOS, GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA, USA). Demographic and clinical characteristic data were analysed with Student’s t-test, while immunohistochemistry scoring data were evaluated with a chi-square test. A p value of <0.05 was considered as statistically significant.

5. Conclusions

The loss of TSSC3 promotes placental growth, and the loss of p57/RB1 increases cell proliferation. These may represent the pathogenesis of hydatidiform moles. The diagnosis of hydatidiform moles can be challenging without the support of an ancillary test. TSSC3 and RB1 could be used as an adjunct in the diagnosis of hydatidiform moles, particularly when p57 immunohistochemistry provides an equivocal result.

Supplementary Materials

The supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ijms24119656/s1.

Author Contributions

Conceptualisation, G.C.T.; methodology, G.C.T.; validation, T.Y.K., Y.P.W. and G.C.T.; formal analysis, W.K.C., P.Y.C., Y.P.W. and G.C.T.; data curation, W.K.C., P.Y.C., N.H.A.A., S.S., Y.K.C. and M.M.; writing, W.K.C. and S.S.; writing—review and editing, T.Y.K., Y.P.W. and G.C.T.; supervision, T.Y.K., Y.P.W. and G.C.T.; funding acquisition, G.C.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE), Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS). Grant code: FRGS/1/2019/SKK13/UKM/02/1. The article processing fee was funded by the Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee of UNIVERSITI KEBANGSAAN MALAYSIA (protocol code JEP-2019-820 and 13 August 2019).

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable for study using archived formalin fixed paraffin embedded section with unidentifiable patient data.

Data Availability Statement

All our data already provided in the supplementary materials.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the Department of Pathology for allowing us to conduct this study. W.K.C. and P.Y.C. are our postgraduate students.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Yamamoto, E.; Trinh, T.D.; Sekiya, Y.; Tamakoshi, K.; Nguyen, X.P.; Nishino, K.; Niimi, K.; Kotani, T.; Kajiyama, H.; Shibata, K.; et al. The management of hydatidiform mole using prophylactic chemotherapy and hysterectomy for high-risk patients decreased the incidence of gestational trophoblastic neoplasia in Vietnam: A retrospective observational study. Nagoya J. Med. Sci. 2020, 82, 183–191. [Google Scholar]
  2. Tham, B.W.L.; Everard, J.E.; Tidy, J.A.; Drew, D.; Hancock, B.W. Gestational trophoblastic disease in the Asian population of Northern England and North Wales. BJOG 2003, 110, 555–559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Zainal, N.; Kampan, N.C.; Rose, I.M.; Ghazali, R.; Shafiee, M.N.; Yussoff, N.H.; Tamil, A.; Jamil, M.A.; Hussin, N.H. Complementary role of p57kip2 immunostaining in diagnosing hydatidiform mole subtypes. Horm. Mol. Biol. Clin. Investig. 2021, 42, 311–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Nirmala, C.K.; Nor Azlin, M.I.; Harry, S.R.; Lim, P.S.; Shafiee, M.N.; Nur Azurah, A.G.; Omar, M.H.; Hatta, M.D. Outcome of molar pregnancies in Malaysia: A tertiary centre experience. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2013, 33, 191–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Wong, Y.P.; Chia, W.K.; Selimin, A.; Chia, P.Y.; Mustangin, M.; Shuib, S.; Khong, T.Y.; Tan, G.C. Diagnostic utility of p57 immunohistochemistry and DNA ploidy analysis by fluorescence in situ hybridisation in hydatidiform moles. Malays. J. Pathol. 2021, 43, 341–351. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  6. Prabhu, I.K.; Rosenbaum, A. Hydatidiform Mole in a Patient With a Concern for Neoplasia: A Case Report. Cureus 2020, 12, e10319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Madi, J.M.; Braga, A.; Paganella, M.P.; Litvin, I.E.; Wendland, E.M. Accuracy of p57KIP2 compared with genotyping to diagnose complete hydatidiform mole: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG 2018, 125, 1226–1233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Ronnett, B.M. Hydatidiform moles: Ancillary techniques to refine diagnosis. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 2018, 142, 1485–1502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Castrillon, D.H.; Sun, D.; Weremowicz, S.; Fisher, R.A.; Crum, C.P.; Genest, D.R. Discrimination of complete hydatidiform mole from its mimics by immunohistochemistry of the paternally imprinted gene product p57KIP2. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2001, 25, 1225–1230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Tycko, B. Imprinted genes in placental growth and obstetric disorders. Cytogenet. Genome Res. 2006, 113, 271–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Hayati, A.R.; Tan, G.C. Clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical differences in complete and partial hydatidiform moles in a multiracial Malaysian population. Int. J. Gynecol. Pathol. 2005, 24, 277–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Kihara, M.; Matsui, H.; Seki, K.; Nagai, Y.; Wake, N.; Sekiya, S. Genetic origin and imprinting in hydatidiform moles. Comparison between DNA polymorphism analysis and immunoreactivity of p57KIP2. J. Reprod. Med. 2005, 50, 307–312. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  13. Osterheld, M.C.; Caron, L.; Chaubert, P.; Meagher-Villemure, K. Combination of immunohistochemistry and ploidy analysis to assist histopathological diagnosis of molar diseases. Clin. Med. Pathol. 2008, 1, 61–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Khooei, A.; Atabaki Pasdar, F.; Fazel, A.; Mahmoudi, M.; Nikravesh, M.R.; Khaje Delui, M.; Pourheydar, B. Ki-67 expression in hydatidiform moles and hydropic abortions. Iran. Red. Crescent. Med. J. 2013, 15, 590–594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  15. Lund, H.; Nielsen, S.; Grove, A.; Vyberg, M.; Sunde, L. p57 in Hydatidiform Moles: Evaluation of Antibodies and Expression in Various Cell Types. Appl. Immunohistochem. Mol. Morphol. 2020, 28, 694–701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. McConnell, T.G.; Murphy, K.M.; Hafez, M.; Vang, R.; Ronnett, B.M. Diagnosis and subclassification of hydatidiform moles using p57 immunohistochemistry and molecular genotyping: Validation and prospective analysis in routine and consultation practice settings with development of an algorithmic approach. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2009, 33, 805–817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Furtado, L.V.; Paxton, C.N.; Jama, M.A.; Tripp, S.R.; Wilson, A.R.; Lyon, E.; Jarboe, E.A.; Thaker, H.M.; Geiersbach, K.B. Diagnostic utility of microsatellite genotyping for molar pregnancy testing. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 2013, 137, 55–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Imprinted Genes: By Species. Available online: https://www.geneimprint.com/site/genes-by-species.Homo+sapiens.imprinted-M (accessed on 9 March 2023).
  19. Xing, D.; Adams, E.; Huang, J.; Ronnett, B.M. Refined diagnosis of hydatidiform moles with p57 immunohistochemistry and molecular genotyping: Updated analysis of a prospective series of 2217 cases. Mod. Pathol. 2021, 34, 961–982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Bajrami, E.; Spiroski, M. Genomic Imprinting. Open Access Maced. J. Med. Sci. 2016, 4, 181–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Isles, A.R.; Davies, W.; Wilkinson, L.S. Genomic imprinting and the social brain. Philos. Trans. R Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 2006, 361, 2229–2237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Plasschaert, R.N.; Bartolomei, M.S. Genomic imprinting in development, growth, behavior and stem cells. Development 2014, 141, 1805–1813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  23. Hui, P.; Buza, N.; Murphy, K.M.; Ronnett, B.M. Hydatidiform Moles: Genetic Basis and Precision Diagnosis. Annu. Rev. Pathol. 2017, 12, 449–485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Creeth, H.D.J.; McNamara, G.I.; Isles, A.R.; John, R.M. Imprinted genes influencing the quality of maternal care. Front. Neuroendocrinol. 2019, 53, 100732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Fisher, R.A.; Hodges, M.D.; Newlands, E.S. Familial recurrent hydatidiform mole: A review. J. Reprod. Med 2004, 49, 595–601. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  26. Murdoch, S.; Djuric, U.; Mazhar, B.; Seoud, M.; Khan, R.; Kuick, R.; Bagga, R.; Kircheisen, R.; Ao, A.; Ratti, B.; et al. Mutations in NALP7 cause recurrent hydatidiform moles and reproductive wastage in humans. Nat. Genet 2006, 38, 300–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Ngan, H.Y.S.; Seckl, M.J.; Berkowitz, R.S.; Xiang, Y.; Golfier, F.; Sekharan, P.K.; Lurain, J.R.; Massuger, L. Update on the diagnosis and management of gestational trophoblastic disease. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 2018, 143 (Suppl. 2), 79–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Sebire, N.J.; Foskett, M.; Fisher, R.A.; Rees, H.; Seckl, M.; Newlands, E. Risk of partial and complete hydatidiform molar pregnancy in relation to maternal age. BJOG 2002, 109, 99–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Cavaliere, A.; Ermito, S.; Dinatale, A.; Pedata, R. Management of molar pregnancy. J. Prenat. Med. 2009, 3, 15–17. [Google Scholar]
  30. Wong, Y.P.; Tan, G.C.; Aziz, S.; Pongprakyun, S.; Ismail, F. Beta-human Chorionic Gonadotropin-secreting Lung Adenocarcinoma. Malays. J. Med. Sci. 2015, 22, 76–80. [Google Scholar]
  31. Mondal, S.K.; Mandal, S.; Bhattacharya, S.; Panda, U.K.; Ray, A.; Ali, S.M. Expression of p57 immunomarker in the classification and differential diagnosis of partial and complete hydatidiform moles. J. Lab. Physicians 2019, 11, 270–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. López, C.L.; Figueira Gouvêa, A.L.; Rodrigues, F.R.; Braga, A.; Valente Machado, M.D.; Lopes, V.S. Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 fluorescence in situ hybridization and P57KIP2 immunohistochemistry using tissue microarray: Improving histopathological subtyping of hydatidiform mole. Placenta 2020, 99, 166–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Salas, M.; John, R.; Saxena, A.; Barton, S.; Frank, D.; Fitzpatrick, G.; Higgins, M.J.; Tycko, B. Placental growth retardation due to loss of imprinting of Phlda2. Mech. Dev. 2004, 121, 1199–1210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Wrzeska, M.; Rejduch, B. Genomic imprinting in mammals. J. Appl. Genet. 2004, 45, 427–433. [Google Scholar]
  35. Piedrahita, J.A. The role of imprinted genes in fetal growth abnormalities. Birth Defects Res. A Clin. Mol. Teratol. 2011, 91, 682–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  36. Saxena, A.; Frank, D.; Panichkul, P.; Van den Veyver, I.B.; Tycko, B.; Thaker, H. The product of the imprinted gene IPL marks human villous cytotrophoblast and is lost in complete hydatidiform mole. Placenta 2003, 24, 835–842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Lee, M.P.; Feinberg, A.P. Genomic imprinting of a human apoptosis gene homologue, TSSC3. Cancer Res 1998, 58, 1052–1056. [Google Scholar]
  38. Frank, D.; Fortino, W.; Clark, L.; Musalo, R.; Wang, W.; Saxena, A.; Li, C.M.; Reik, W.; Ludwig, T.; Tycko, B. Placental overgrowth in mice lacking the imprinted gene Ipl. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2002, 99, 7490–7495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Takao, T.; Asanoma, K.; Tsunematsu, R.; Kato, K.; Wake, N. The maternally expressed gene Tssc3 regulates the expression of MASH2 transcription factor in mouse trophoblast stem cells through the AKT-Sp1 signaling pathway. J. Biol. Chem. 2012, 287, 42685–42694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Kato, H.; Matsuda, T.; Hirakawa, T.; Ueda, K.; Inoue, T.; Miyanari, Y.; Asanoma, K.; Nakano, H.; Wake, N. Differential diagnosis between complete and partial mole by TSSC3 antibody completely correlates to DNA diagnosis. Diagn. Mol. Pathol. 2005, 14, 164–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Thaker, H.M.; Berlin, A.; Tycko, B.; Goldstein, D.P.; Berkowitz, R.S.; Castrillon, D.H.; Genest, D.R. Immunohistochemistry for the imprinted gene product IPL/PHLDA2 for facilitating the differential diagnosis of complete hydatidiform mole. J. Reprod. Med. 2004, 49, 630–636. [Google Scholar]
  42. Kanber, D.; Berulava, T.; Ammerpohl, O.; Mitter, D.; Richter, J.; Siebert, R.; Horsthemke, B.; Lohmann, D.; Buiting, K. The human retinoblastoma gene is imprinted. PLoS Genet. 2009, 5, e1000790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Buiting, K.; Kanber, D.; Horsthemke, B.; Lohmann, D. Imprinting of RB1 (the new kid on the block). Brief Funct. Genomics 2010, 9, 347–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  44. Rahat, B.; Thakur, S.; Hamid, A.; Bagga, R.; Kaur, J. Association of aberrant methylation at promoter regions of tumor suppressor genes with placental pathologies. Epigenomics 2016, 8, 767–787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Matsuoka, S.; Thompson, J.S.; Edwards, M.C.; Bartletta, J.M.; Grundy, P.; Kalikin, L.M.; Harper, J.W.; Elledge, S.J.; Feinberg, A.P. Imprinting of the gene encoding a human cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor, p57KIP2, on chromosome 11p15. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1996, 93, 3026–3030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Miettinen, M.; Wang, Z.F.; Lasota, J. DOG1 antibody in the differential diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumors: A study of 1840 cases. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2009, 33, 1401–1408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Lezcano, C.; Ho, J.; Seethala, R.R. Sox10 and DOG1 Expression in Primary Adnexal Tumors of the Skin. Am. J. Dermatopathol. 2017, 39, 896–902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Mirkovic, J.; Elias, K.; Drapkin, R.; Barletta, J.A.; Quade, B.; Hirsch, M.S. GATA3 expression in gestational trophoblastic tissues and tumours. Histopathology 2015, 67, 636–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Banet, N.; Gown, A.M.; Shih, I.M.; Kay Li, Q.; Roden, R.B.; Nucci, M.R.; Cheng, L.; Przybycin, C.G.; Nasseri-Nik, N.; Wu, L.S.; et al. GATA-3 expression in trophoblastic tissues: An immunohistochemical study of 445 cases, including diagnostic utility. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2015, 39, 101–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Robaina, M.C.; Mazzoccoli, L.; Arruda, V.O.; Reis, F.R.S.; Apa, A.G.; de Rezende, L.M.M.; Klumb, C.E. Deregulation of DNMT1, DNMT3B and miR-29s in Burkitt lymphoma suggests novel contribution for disease pathogenesis. Exp. Mol. Pathol. 2015, 98, 200–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Mukhopadhyay, A.; Ravikumar, G.; Meraaj, H.; Dwarkanath, P.; Thomas, A.; Crasta, J.; Thomas, T.; Kurpad, A.V.; Sridhar, T.S. Placental expression of DNA methyltransferase 1 (DNMT1): Gender-specific relation with human placental growth. Placenta 2016, 48, 119–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Sharifah, N.A.; Zakaria, Z.; Chia, W.K. FISH analysis using PPAR γ-specific probes for detection of PAX8-PPAR γ translocation in follicular thyroid neoplasms. Methods. Mol. Biol. 2013, 952, 187–196. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
Ijms 24 09656 g001 550
Figure 1. p57 immunohistochemistry and FISH DNA ploidy analysis. Our cases were categorised into complete mole, partial mole and non-molar abortus by histomorphology, p57 and ploidy studies. (A) In complete mole, there is loss of p57 expression in the cytotrophoblast cells (×20). In contrast, strong p57 expression was observed in the nuclei of cytotrophoblast cells of (B) partial mole (×20) and (C) non-molar abortus (×20). FISH using centromere 11 (green) probe and centromere 16 (red) probe showed the presence of two green and two red signals (diploid) (×100) (D) complete mole and (F) non-molar abortus, while in partial mole (E), three green and three red signals (triploid) were observed. FISH using centromeric X (green) and centromeric Y (red) probes showed two green signals, indicating XX in complete mole (G). (H) Partial mole showed two green signals and one red signal pattern (XXY). (I) Non-molar abortus showed one green and one red signal (XY).
Figure 1. p57 immunohistochemistry and FISH DNA ploidy analysis. Our cases were categorised into complete mole, partial mole and non-molar abortus by histomorphology, p57 and ploidy studies. (A) In complete mole, there is loss of p57 expression in the cytotrophoblast cells (×20). In contrast, strong p57 expression was observed in the nuclei of cytotrophoblast cells of (B) partial mole (×20) and (C) non-molar abortus (×20). FISH using centromere 11 (green) probe and centromere 16 (red) probe showed the presence of two green and two red signals (diploid) (×100) (D) complete mole and (F) non-molar abortus, while in partial mole (E), three green and three red signals (triploid) were observed. FISH using centromeric X (green) and centromeric Y (red) probes showed two green signals, indicating XX in complete mole (G). (H) Partial mole showed two green signals and one red signal pattern (XXY). (I) Non-molar abortus showed one green and one red signal (XY).
Ijms 24 09656 g001
Ijms 24 09656 g002 550
Figure 2. The immunohistochemistry profile of paternal- and maternal-imprinted genes (×20). There was no TSSC3 expression in the cytoplasm of cytotrophoblasts of complete mole (A). In contrast, both partial mole (B) and non-molar abortus (C) showed strong cytoplasmic TSSC3 expression in cytotrophoblasts. RB1 was weakly positive in nuclei of cytotrophoblasts in complete mole (D). However, it showed strong immunoreactivity in the nuclei of cytotrophoblasts of both partial mole (E) and non-molar abortus (F). DOG1 was not expressed in complete mole (G), partial mole (H) and non-molar abortus (I). Strong DNMT1 immunoreactivity was seen in the nuclei of cytotrophoblasts of complete mole (J), partial mole (K) and non-molar abortus (L). Strong GATA3 immunoreactivity was seen in the nuclei of cytotrophoblasts of complete mole (M), partial mole (N) and non-molar abortus (O).
Figure 2. The immunohistochemistry profile of paternal- and maternal-imprinted genes (×20). There was no TSSC3 expression in the cytoplasm of cytotrophoblasts of complete mole (A). In contrast, both partial mole (B) and non-molar abortus (C) showed strong cytoplasmic TSSC3 expression in cytotrophoblasts. RB1 was weakly positive in nuclei of cytotrophoblasts in complete mole (D). However, it showed strong immunoreactivity in the nuclei of cytotrophoblasts of both partial mole (E) and non-molar abortus (F). DOG1 was not expressed in complete mole (G), partial mole (H) and non-molar abortus (I). Strong DNMT1 immunoreactivity was seen in the nuclei of cytotrophoblasts of complete mole (J), partial mole (K) and non-molar abortus (L). Strong GATA3 immunoreactivity was seen in the nuclei of cytotrophoblasts of complete mole (M), partial mole (N) and non-molar abortus (O).
Ijms 24 09656 g002
Table
Table 1. Demographic and clinical characteristics of complete mole, partial mole and non-molar abortus in this study.
Table 1. Demographic and clinical characteristics of complete mole, partial mole and non-molar abortus in this study.
DemographicCM
n (%)		PM
n (%)		NMA
n (%)		p Value
CM vs. PM
Age range (years old)21–5124–3821–42
Mean (SD)34.9 (8.841)31.3 (4.03)33.7 (6.828)p = 0.4567
20–29 years old9 (31.0%)5 (33.3%)5 (29.4%)
30–39 years old12 (41.4%)10 (66.7%)7 (41.2%)
40 years old and above8 (27.6%)0 (0%)5 (29.4%)
Gestational age range (weeks)7–159–188–12
Mean (SD) a10.60 (2.415)13.17 (3.125)10.57 (1.284)p = 0.0247 *
β-hCG levels range (mIU/mL)22,683–1,000,0006985–369,109<1.2–25,888
Mean (SD) b234,024 (250,856)102,174 (135,505)10,124 (12,563)p = 0.0227 *
Ethnicity
Malay23 (79.3%)15 (100%)15 (88.2%)
Chinese3 (10.3%)0 (0%)2 (11.8%)
Others (Punjabi, Caucasian)3 (10.3%)0 (0%)0 (0%)
CM—Complete mole, PM—Partial mole, NMA—Non-molar abortus, a Number of cases in gestational age: 25 CM, 12 PM and 14 NMA, b Number of cases in β-hCG levels: 24 CM, 10 PM and 4 NMA, * p value of <0.05 is considered as statistically significant.
Table
Table 2. Expressions of paternally imprinted genes (TSSC3 and RB1) of the various placental cell types in complete mole, partial mole and non-molar abortus.
Table 2. Expressions of paternally imprinted genes (TSSC3 and RB1) of the various placental cell types in complete mole, partial mole and non-molar abortus.
TSSC3 CMPMNMAp Value
CM vs. PM		p Value
CM vs. NMA
CTPositive91517<0.0001 *<0.0001 *
Negative2000
VSCPositive0200.1111.0
Negative291317
STPositive0001.01.0
Negative291517
ITPositive2540.16560.0358
Negative271012
DCPositive2312120.27850.2785
Negative133
RB1
CTPositive31516<0.0001 *<0.0001 *
Negative2601
VSCPositive1001.01.0
Negative281517
STPositive0001.01.0
Negative291517
ITPositive2915171.01.0
Negative000
DCPositive2213131.01.0
Negative321
CM—complete mole, PM—partial mole, NMA—non-molar abortus, CT—cytotrophoblast, VSC—villous stromal cell, ST—syncytiotrophoblast, IT—intermediate trophoblast, DC—decidual cell, * p value of <0.05 is considered as statistically significant.
Table
Table 3. Expression of maternally imprinted genes (DNMT1 and GATA3) of the various cell types in complete mole, partial mole and non-molar abortus.
Table 3. Expression of maternally imprinted genes (DNMT1 and GATA3) of the various cell types in complete mole, partial mole and non-molar abortus.
DNMT1 CMPMNMAp Value
CM vs. PM		p Value
CM vs. NMA
CTPositive2915171.01.0
Negative000
VSCPositive12520.74770.0487 *
Negative171015
STPositive15670.5350.552
Negative14910
ITPositive2714131.00.1744
Negative214
DCPositive13881.01.0
Negative1075
GATA3
CTPositive2815161.01.0
Negative100
VSCPositive0001.01.0
Negative291517
STPositive2715160.54020.5313
Negative200
ITPositive2915171.01.0
Negative000
DCPositive1820.0008 *0.547
Negative23713
CM—complete mole, PM—partial mole, NMA—non-molar abortus, CT—cytotrophoblast, VSC—villous stromal cell, ST—syncytiotrophoblast, IT—intermediate trophoblast, DC—decidual cell, * p value of <0.05 is considered as statistically significant.
Table
Table 4. The utility of TSSC3 and RB1 in establishing the diagnosis of equivocal cases.
Table 4. The utility of TSSC3 and RB1 in establishing the diagnosis of equivocal cases.
Sample No.PM002PM003PM009PM019
Maternal age (years)30303827
Gestational age (weeks)NA818Not available
β-hCG level (mIU/mL)184,108.50181,113.2033,906Not available
Preliminary diagnosis based on histomorphological features alone? Partial moleUncertain? Partial mole? Partial mole
p57 immunohistochemistry (Percentage of positivity)100%50%60%100%
DNA Ploidy Status2n, XX2n, XX3n, XXX2n, XX
Diagnosis (histomorphology + p57 + DNA ploidy study)Non-molar abortusUncertainPartial moleNon-molar abortus
TSSC3 immunohistochemistry (Intensity/percentage)Positive
3+/20%		Positive
2+/50%		Positive
3+/50%		Positive
3+/40%
RB1 immunohistochemistry (Percentage)Positive
50%		Negative
40%		Positive
100%		Positive
100%
Final diagnosisNon-molar abortusNon-molar abortusPartial moleNon-molar abortus
TSSC3 and RB1 remarksReinforced the diagnosisThe p57 staining was equivocal in this case. TSSC3 showed 50% positivity; it is likely a non-molar abortus. Except for the rare possibility of a diploid biparental complete mole or a retention of maternal DNA.Reinforced the diagnosisReinforced the diagnosis
Table
Table 5. List of antibodies of paternally and maternally imprinted genes.
Table 5. List of antibodies of paternally and maternally imprinted genes.
Primary Antibodies
[Clone Code]		ManufacturerCatalog NumberImprinted GeneExpression SiteControlDilution Factor
P57 Rabbit monoclonal [EP2515Y]Abcam, Cambridge, UKAB75974PaternalNucleusPlacenta1:500
RB Rabbit monoclonal [EPR17512]Abcam, Cambridge, UKAB181616PaternalNucleusTonsil1:1500
TSSC3 Rabbit polyclonalAbcam, Cambridge, UKAB234669PaternalCytoplasmPlacenta1:300
DOG1 Rabbit monoclonal (SP31)Cell Marque, California, USA244R-14PaternalCytoplasmGIST1:500
DNMT1 Rabbit monoclonal [EPR18453]Abcam, Cambridge, UKAB188453MaternalNucleusTonsil1:100
GATA3 Mouse monoclonal (L50-823)Cell Marque, California, USA390M-14MaternalNucleusPlacenta1:500
GIST—gastrointestinal stromal tumour, UK—United Kingdom, USA—United States of America.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Chia, W.K.; Chia, P.Y.; Abdul Aziz, N.H.; Shuib, S.; Mustangin, M.; Cheah, Y.K.; Khong, T.Y.; Wong, Y.P.; Tan, G.C. Diagnostic Utility of TSSC3 and RB1 Immunohistochemistry in Hydatidiform Mole. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 9656. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24119656

AMA Style

Chia WK, Chia PY, Abdul Aziz NH, Shuib S, Mustangin M, Cheah YK, Khong TY, Wong YP, Tan GC. Diagnostic Utility of TSSC3 and RB1 Immunohistochemistry in Hydatidiform Mole. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2023; 24(11):9656. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24119656

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chia, Wai Kit, Pik Yuen Chia, Nor Haslinda Abdul Aziz, Salwati Shuib, Muaatamarulain Mustangin, Yoke Kqueen Cheah, Teck Yee Khong, Yin Ping Wong, and Geok Chin Tan. 2023. "Diagnostic Utility of TSSC3 and RB1 Immunohistochemistry in Hydatidiform Mole" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 24, no. 11: 9656. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24119656

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop