CD10 is expressed in most epithelioid hemangioendotheliomas: a potential diagnostic pitfall.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: -Epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE) is a vascular neoplasm that occasionally is difficult to distinguish from primary/metastatic carcinomas, particularly when EHEs express keratins. We recently encountered an EHE with strong CD10 positivity mimicking renal cell carcinoma. OBJECTIVE: -To examine sensitivity and specificity of CD10 in EHE. DESIGN: -Nine EHEs were stained with keratins, factor VIII, CD31, CD34, and CD10. Mimics of EHE were also retrieved and stained with CD10. RESULTS: -The EHE patients included 5 men and 4 women. Patients ranged in age from 24 to 74 years. Tumors were located in liver (3), skin (2), lung/pleura (2), and sternomastoid and mediastinum (1 each). Two had skin metastases. All EHEs were positive for vascular markers. A total of 7 of 9 primary tumors expressed cytoplasmic and intracytoplasmic luminal CD10. The 2 skin metastases were positive, whereas 2 primary skin EHEs were negative. Of the mimics, CD10 showed staining in 7 of 23 cases: 3 of 3 renal cell carcinomas, 1 of 7 other carcinomas, 2 of 3 epithelioid angiosarcomas, 1 of 3 melanomas, 0 of 3 mesotheliomas, and 0 of 4 epithelioid hemangiomas. CONCLUSIONS: -CD10 has a sensitivity of 78% (confidence interval, 63.6%-92.4%) and specificity of 70% (confidence interval, 54%-85.9%) for EHE. There is a growing list of tumors that show expression of CD10. Pathologists should be aware of this diagnostic pitfall.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".