Atypical Lipomatous Tumor/Well-Differentiated Liposarcoma With Features Mimicking Spindle Cell Lipoma

Atypical lipomatous tumor/well-differentiated liposarcoma (ALT/WDL) and spindle cell lipoma are lipomatous tumors with distinct clinical, molecular, and prognostic features. Although histological and immunophenotypic features can overlap between ALT/WDL and spindle cell lipoma, the oncogenesis and clinical behavior are markedly different. In borderline cases, molecular analysis for MDM2 or CDK4 amplification can aid in distinguishing ALT/WDL from spindle cell lipoma. Although dedifferentiated liposarcoma has been reported to harbor both MDM2 amplification and loss of the RB1 region, we are not aware of a reported RB1 loss in well-differentiated ALT/WDL. In this article, we present a 69-year-old woman with a lipomatous tumor in the gluteal region that histologically, immunohistochemically, and molecularly mimicked spindle cell lipoma (with positive immunohistochemical staining for CD34 and loss of the RB1 gene region), yet harbored amplification of MDM2 and CDK4 confirmed by fluorescence in situ hybridization, supporting classification as ALT/WDL. This case strengthens the argument that in atypical clinical contexts, molecular studies for MDM2/CDK4 should be considered in tumors resembling spindle cell lipoma.

Pseudosarcomatous myofibroblastic proliferations of the genitourinary tract are genetically different from nodular fasciitis and lack USP6, ROS1 and ETV6 gene rearrangements

AIMS

Pseudosarcomatous myofibroblastic proliferations of the genitourinary tract have a debatable relationship with inflammatory myofibroblastic tumour (generally lacking ALK rearrangement); however, they share several overlapping features with nodular fasciitis of soft tissue. As rearrangement of the USP6 gene has been recently recognised as a recurrent alteration in soft tissue nodular fasciitis, and several other alternative gene fusions have been recently recognised in inflammatory myofibroblastic tumour, the aim of this study was to investigate whether USP6, ROS1 or ETV6 rearrangements were present in these lesions (12 cases).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Fluorescence in-situ hybridisation analysis was performed by the use of bacterial artificial chromosome-derived break-apart probes against USP6, ROS1, and ETV6. Two cases with adequate genetic material from recent paraffin tissue blocks were also tested by use of a solid tumour gene fusion detection assay via next-generation sequencing, targeting >50 known genes involved in recurrent fusions. None of the genitourinary pseudosarcomatous myofibroblastic proliferations was found to harbour USP6 (0/12), ROS1 (0/8) or ETV6 (0/7) rearrangements, and no gene fusions were detected in two cases studied by sequencing.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite overlap in histological and immunohistochemical features between pseudosarcomatous myofibroblastic proliferation and nodular fasciitis, these tumours lack the recently recognised USP6 rearrangements that occur in nodular fasciitis, as well as alternative fusions found in ALK-negative inflammatory myofibroblastic tumours. At present, this diagnosis remains based primarily on clinical, histological and immunohistochemical features.