Solitary Fibrous Tumor With Extensive Epithelial Inclusions

OBJECTIVES

Solitary fibrous tumor (SFT) harboring extensive epithelial inclusions is rare and can stimulate a biphasic neoplasm composed of epithelial and stromal elements.

METHODS

Three cases of SFT with extensive epithelial inclusions were retrieved. H&E stain, immunohistochemical stain, and targeted next-generation sequencing were performed.

RESULTS

There were two male patients and one female patient aged 54, 32, and 68 years. All tumors were located in abdominopelvic sites involving the kidney (case 1), omentum (case 2), and prostate (case 3), respectively. Microscopically, all tumors were circumscribed and composed of a background of SFT admixed with randomly embedded glands or cysts, organizing sometimes in a phyllodes-like architecture. The covered epithelium displayed a range of morphologies from simple cystic to stratified and to complex papillary proliferation. Immunohistochemically, both STAT6 and CD34 were expressed in the spindle cells but not in the epithelial inclusions. RNA sequencing revealed fusions involving NAB2~STAT6 in all cases. DNA sequencing demonstrated TERT c.-124C>T mutation in case 1. Prognostic stratification scores were intermediate in case 1 and low in cases 2 and 3.

CONCLUSIONS

SFT with extensive epithelial inclusions represents a rare but potentially underrecognized variant of SFT and shows compatible molecular features with conventional SFT.

Malignant solitary fibrous tumour of the prostate: four cases emphasising significant histological and immunophenotypical overlap with sarcomatoid carcinoma

Solitary fibrous tumour (SFT) is well-described in the urinary tract, but malignant examples are rare. We studied our experience with high grade malignant SFT of the prostate to address the degree of histological and immunophenotypical overlap with sarcomatoid carcinoma and prostatic stromal sarcoma. Four cases were identified from the surgical pathology consultation archives. All available H&E stained sections were reviewed. Immunostains for STAT6, CAM5.2, NKX3.1, PAX-8, GATA3, high molecular weight cytokeratin (34BE12), p40, and p63 were performed on available material. Each case was evaluated by three separate SFT prognostic risk models based on clinicopathological features, and for features of 'dedifferentiated SFT'. The patient's ages were 49, 55, 69, and 73 years. Three presented with symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia and one with haematuria. Tumour sizes were 5, 9, 13, and 13 cm. Mitotic rate ranged from 6 to 20 mitoses per 10 high power fields, and two cases showed abrupt transition from conventional SFT to areas with marked nuclear pleomorphism/anaplasia (i.e., 'de-differentiation'). Immunophenotypically, all four cases had strong and diffuse nuclear reactivity for STAT6. For other markers, three of three had both focal PR and GATA3 nuclear expression (up to 30% of cells). One case with 'dedifferentiated' features showed expression of multiple epithelial markers, including EMA (focal), high molecular weight cytokeratin (focal), p63, and p40. In summary, malignant SFT may rarely occur in the prostate and may closely mimic sarcomatoid carcinoma or prostatic stromal sarcoma, both histologically and immunophenotypically. Consideration of the diagnostic possibility of malignant SFT, recognition of unexpected GATA3 and PR expression, and utilisation of monoclonal STAT6 immunohistochemistry facilitate appropriate diagnosis at this unusual anatomical site.