Spatial Clonal Discordance in Early Mycosis Fungoides Revealed by Compartment-specific TRBC1 Immunohistochemistry
- Journal
- The American journal of surgical pathology (Q1)
- Published
- 6 November 2026
- Study design
- Retrospective cohort
- Evidence level
- Level 3, Low (CEBM 3b)
- Authors
- Huang C, Shao X, Zang J, Wang H, Song H, Zhang Y, et al.
- PMID
- 42989715
- DOI
- 10.1097/PAS.0000000000002640
Why clinicians should know about it
- Picked for Pathology and Forensic Medicine (top studies of the week, 8 November 2026): Compartment-specific TRBC1 IHC aids early lymphoma diagnosis
Abstract
Diagnosis of early mycosis fungoides (MF) is hindered by overlap with benign dermatoses and by the variable sensitivity of conventional polymerase chain reaction-based molecular clonality assays in paucicellular specimens. We demonstrate that T-cell receptor β-chain constant region 1 (TRBC1) immunohistochemistry (IHC) provides a spatially resolved assessment of T-cell clonality that may aid the evaluation of early MF. In early MF, we identified a characteristic "spatial clonal discordance," where monotypic TRBC1 expression is confined to intraepidermal T cells while dermal infiltrates remain polytypic. This compartment-specific pattern reflects neoplastic epidermotropism and may help explain discordant clonality results obtained by bulk molecular assays in paucicellular lesions. Conversely, tumor-stage MF and Sézary syndrome exhibited spatially concordant, pan-compartmental restriction. Digital image analysis showed high concordance between single-stain IHC and multiplex immunofluorescence, establishing TRBC1+ thresholds of ≤25% or ≥75% for defining clonality. Although this study is limited by its retrospective, single-center design and relatively small cohort, the findings establish TRBC1 IHC as a powerful, spatially informative tool. It effectively overcomes the "dilution effect" of reactive cells in early MF, serving as a high-sensitivity adjunct to conventional molecular testing for accurate, compartment-specific clonal evaluation.
Abstract as published, via PubMed.
For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.