Lymphoma versus Carcinoma and Other Collaborations.

Karen Pulford

doi:10.3390/cells11010174

Abstract

David Mason started his research career at a time when lymphoma diagnosis was based primarily on cellular morphology, clinical symptoms and special cytochemical stains using formalin fixed tissue sections. There were occasions, however, where the morphology was unhelpful, such as in the case of anaplastic or poorly differentiated tumours, where a distinction between lymphoma and a non-haematopoietic tumour was often problematical. Accurate diagnosis became even more important with the developments in the clinical staging of lymphoma and the availability of more effective treatments. One way forward to improve diagnosis was to use immunohistochemistry to study the antigens expressed by the tumor cells.

Highlights

Immunohistochemistry has come a long way since the immunofluorescence technique used by Coons et al [1]
Later immunoenzymatic labelling techniques using horseradish peroxidase (HRP)-conjugated primary [2] and secondary antibodies [3] permitted the sites of antigen/antibody binding to be visualised using light microscopy
Using HRP labelled polyclonal antibodies, they reported the presence of intracellular immunoglobulin light chain in formalin-fixed sections of multiple myeloma

Summary

Background

Immunohistochemistry has come a long way since the immunofluorescence technique used by Coons et al [1]. Later immunoenzymatic labelling techniques using horseradish peroxidase (HRP)-conjugated primary [2] and secondary antibodies [3] permitted the sites of antigen/antibody binding to be visualised using light microscopy. This opened up opportunities for immunohistochemistry to be used within a clinical diagnostic context [4,5]. This was the ‘state of play’ when David Mason started his research career in haematopathology

First Steps

Launch of the LRF Immunodiagnostics Unit

Overcoming the Fixation Problem—Lymphoma or Carcinoma?

Collaborations and Classifications

Conclusions