Isabelle Hostein

Detection of MDM2-CDK4 amplification by fluorescence in situ hybridization in 200 paraffin-embedded tumor samples: utility in diagnosing adipocytic lesions and comparison with immunohistochemistry and real-time PCR.

Atypical lipomatous tumor/well-differentiated liposarcomas and dedifferentiated liposarcomas are characterized by the amplification of MDM2 and CDK4 genes. To evaluate the accuracy of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analysis in the differential diagnosis of adipose tissue tumors, we investigated MDM2-CDK4 status by FISH, real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) [quantitative PCR (Q-PCR)] and immunohistochemistry (IHC) in a series of 200 adipose tumors. First, we evaluated MDM2-CDK4 amplification and expression in a series of 94 well-defined adipose tissue tumors. Results showed that FISH was interpretable in 45 of 50 cases (90%), and was more specific and sensitive than Q-PCR and IHC. We then used the same techniques as complementary diagnostic tools in a series of 106 adipose and soft tissue tumors of unclear diagnosis to distinguish between (i) lipomas and atypical lipomatous tumor/well-differentiated liposarcomas, (ii) malignant undifferentiated tumors and dedifferentiated liposarcomas, and (iii) a variety of benign tumors and liposarcomas. Our results indicate that although helpful, IHC alone is often insufficient to solve diagnostic problems. FISH and Q-PCR methods gave concordant results and were equally informative in most cases. However, the proportion of noninterpretable cases was slightly higher with FISH than with Q-PCR. When tumor cells represented a minor component of the tumor tissue, such as with inflammatory tumors, FISH was more powerful than Q-PCR by allowing visualization of individual cells. In conclusion, we recommend that the evaluation of MDM2-CDK4 amplification using FISH or Q-PCR be used to supplement IHC analysis when diagnosis of adipose tissue tumors is not possible based on clinical and histologic information alone.

Monophasic fibrous and poorly differentiated synovial sarcoma: immunohistochemical reassessment of 60 t(X;18)(SYT-SSX)-positive cases.

Diagnosing monophasic fibrous and poorly differentiated synovial sarcoma (SS) on morphology alone is often a source of problems for pathologists. SS bear the t(X;18)(p11.2,q11.2) translocation, which proved to be specific for this tumor type and is currently considered one of the most reliable diagnostic criteria. To evaluate the sensitivity of immunohistochemical techniques in diagnosing monophasic fibrous SS (MFSS) and poorly differentiated SS (PDSS), we examined 60 t(X;18)(SYT-SSX)-positive cases (47 MFSS and 13 PDSS) for cytokeratin AE1/AE3, cytokeratin KL1, epithelial membrane antigen, E-cadherin, CD34, S-100 protein, &agr;-smooth muscle actin, desmin, h-caldesmon, CD99, bcl2, and C-kit (CD117) antibodies. Of the four epithelial markers tested, epithelial membrane antigen proved to be the most sensitive, reacting with 100% of MFSS and 92% of PDSS, followed by cytokeratin AE1/AE3 (70% of MFSS, 46% of PDSS), cytokeratin KL1 (49% of MFSS, 38% of PDSS), and E-cadherin (47% of MFSS, 54% of PDSS). A staining for cytokeratin AE1/AE3 and/or E-cadherin was observed in 79% of MFSS and 69% of PDSS, and a staining for cytokeratin KL1 and/or E-cadherin was observed in 74% of MFSS and 62% of PDSS. S-100 protein was positive in 38% of MFSS and 23% of PDSS, and &agr;-smooth muscle actin in 21% of MFSS and 8% of PDSS. Tumor cells were rarely positive for CD34 (6% of MFSS, 0% of PDSS) and desmin (2% of MFSS, 0% of PDSS). Most SS were strongly positive for bcl-2 (91% of MFSS, 92% of PDSS) and CD99 (91% of MFSS, 100% of PDSS). A weak and focal cytoplasmic reactivity for CD117 was observed in 11% of MFSS (only one case had a strong immunoreactivity) and 8% of PDSS. Staining with h-caldesmon was consistently negative. In conclusion, in keeping with literature data, our results show that reactivity for epithelial membrane antigen, cytokeratin AE1/AE3, and E-cadherin, in combination with CD34 negativity, are the most useful and sensitive markers for diagnosing monophasic fibrous and poorly differentiated t(X;18)-positive SS. They also support the fact that about one third of MFSS and one fourth of PDSS are positive for S-100 protein, a finding of diagnostic relevance when considering their distinction from other spindle to round cell sarcomas, especially malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors.

Most malignant fibrous histiocytomas developed in the retroperitoneum are dedifferentiated liposarcomas: A review of 25 cases initially diagnosed as malignant fibrous histiocytoma

Forty-four samples from 25 cases of retroperitoneal sarcoma initially diagnosed as malignant fibrous histiocytoma were histologically reviewed. Immunohistochemistry for mdm2 and cdk4 was performed on 20 cases. Comparative genomic hybridization was performed on 18 samples from 13 patients. Seventeen cases were reclassified as dedifferentiated liposarcoma. Twenty-one of 32 samples from these patients showed areas of well-differentiated liposarcoma, allowing the diagnosis of dedifferentiated liposarcoma. Immunohistochemistry performed in 15 of these cases showed positivity for mdm2 and cdk4. Comparative genomic hybridization analysis performed on 15 samples from 11 of these patients showed an amplification of the 12q13–15 region. Eight cases were reclassified as poorly differentiated sarcoma. Twelve samples from these patients showed no area of well-differentiated liposarcoma. Immunohistochemistry showed positivity for mdm2 and cdk4 in one of six of these patients and showed positivity for CD34 in another one. Comparative genomic hybridization analysis performed on three samples from two of these patients showed no amplification of the 12q13–15 region but showed complex profiles. This study shows that most so-called malignant fibrous histiocytomas developed in the retroperitoneum are dedifferentiated liposarcoma and that a poorly differentiated sarcoma in this area should prompt extensive sampling to demonstrate a well-differentiated liposarcoma component, immunohistochemistry for mdm2 and cdk4, and if possible, a cytogenetic or a molecular biology analysis.

BRAF Mutation Status in Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are mesenchymal tumors characterized by mutations of KIT or PDGFRA. The objectives of this study were to evaluate BRAF mutations in GISTs and then to correlate BRAF mutational status in the tumor with clinical parameters, with B-raf expression, and with activation of some cellular pathways. BRAF mutation was screened in 321 GISTs with 70 wild-type GISTs. BRAF V600E was detected in 9 (13%) of 70 wild-type GISTs. No mutations were detected in GISTs bearing KIT or PDGFRA mutations. BRAF V600E detection in the tumor does not induce a higher expression of the B-raf protein or the preferential activation of the p42/44 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling pathway compared with GISTs without the BRAF mutation. In comparison with the GIST group with KIT or PDGFRA mutation or the wild-type GIST group without BRAF mutation, the wild-type GIST group with a BRAF mutation is not different in terms of B-raf expression or the p44/42 MAPK- or AKT-activated signaling pathway.

Inflammatory malignant fibrous histiocytomas and dedifferentiated liposarcomas: histological review, genomic profile, and MDM2 and CDK4 status favour a single entity†

Inflammatory malignant fibrous histiocytoma (inflammatory MFH) is a very rare tumour that occurs most often in the retroperitoneum. So far, it has been considered to be a special subtype of MFH. As it is now widely accepted that most retroperitoneal pleomorphic MFHs are dedifferentiated liposarcomas, the present study compared histological features, genomic profile (CGH analysis), and MDM2 and CDK4 status (immunohistochemistry, FISH, and quantitative PCR) in inflammatory MFHs from 12 patients and dedifferentiated liposarcomas that had an inflammatory MFH component from eight patients. Metaphase cytogenetic and FISH analyses were also performed on one inflammatory MFH. Histological review showed areas of well‐differentiated liposarcoma in nine inflammatory MFHs. CGH analysis showed 12q13–15 amplification or gain in six of seven inflammatory MFHs and in seven of seven dedifferentiated liposarcomas. Immunohistochemistry showed positivity of tumour cells for MDM2 in every tumour in both groups and for CDK4 in ten and seven inflammatory MFHs and dedifferentiated liposarcomas, respectively. Metaphase cytogenetic and FISH analysis performed on one inflammatory MFH showed the presence of a supernumerary large marker chromosome and ring chromosome with high‐level amplification of both MDM2 and CDK4 genes. FISH analysis on paraffin wax‐embedded sections showed amplifications of MDM2 and CDK4 in seven of seven inflammatory MFHs and in seven of seven dedifferentiated liposarcomas. Quantitative PCR showed amplification of MDM2 in six and of CDK4 in seven of nine inflammatory MFHs. In conclusion, this study strongly suggests that most so‐called inflammatory MFHs are dedifferentiated liposarcomas. Copyright

KRAS and BRAF Mutational Status in Primary Colorectal Tumors and Related Metastatic Sites: Biological and Clinical Implications

BackgroundKRAS and BRAF mutations in primary colorectal tumors (PT) are predictive of nonresponse to anti–epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibodies in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The question of primary resistance to anti-EGFR treatment as a result of the presence of KRAS or BRAF mutations only in metastases has been raised but not resolved.MethodsWe analyzed the mutational status of KRAS and BRAF in 64 new patients with mCRC and performed a systematic review of published data from 285 patients.ResultsA total of 285 and 95 matched PT/metastases were available for the analysis of the KRAS and the BRAF status, respectively. An identical mutational pattern of KRAS in PT and the matching metastases were reported in all the cases but 14 (5%). In six cases (2%), KRAS was mutated in the PT and wild type in the metastatic site, whereas in eight cases (3%), KRAS was wild type in the PT and mutated in the metastatic site. An identical mutational pattern of BRAF in PT and the matching metastases was reported in all but two cases (3%). In one case (1.5%), BRAF was mutated in the PT and wild type in the metastatic site, whereas in one case (1.5%), BRAF was wild type in the PT and mutated in the metastatic site.ConclusionsThe acquisition by metastases of a KRAS or a BRAF mutation that was not present in the PT is a rare event, occurring in 5% of cases of mCRC. This is not a frequent mechanism of primary resistance to anti-EGFR treatments in mCRC.

Should molecular testing be required for diagnosing synovial sarcoma? A prospective study of 204 cases.

The t(X;18) translocation is a specific marker of synovial sarcomas (SS). Detection of SYT‐SSX transcripts by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was tested on preselected specimens of well‐established histologic types, but to our knowledge, the diagnostic utility of molecular assays on a series of potential SS in comparison with conventional tools has never been reported.

Evaluation of MDM2 and CDK4 amplification by real-time PCR on paraffin wax-embedded material: a potential tool for the diagnosis of atypical lipomatous tumours/well-differentiated liposarcomas

Atypical lipomatous tumours/well‐differentiated liposarcomas and dedifferentiated liposarcomas are characterized by 12q13–15 region amplification. In contrast, this molecular event has not been reported in benign lipomas. Within the 12q13–15 chromosomal region, the MDM2, SAS, HMGA2, and CDK4 genes are the most frequent targets of amplification. A series of lipomas (36 cases) and liposarcomas (48 cases) was analysed for MDM2 and CDK4 gene amplification by real‐time PCR. MDM2 and CDK4 gene amplification was detected in 2.8% and 5.6% of lipomas and 98.2% and 82.4% of liposarcomas, respectively. Moreover, co‐amplification of the two genes as well as a higher‐level amplification was observed more frequently in dedifferentiated liposarcomas than in atypical lipomatous tumours/well‐differentiated liposarcomas. Real‐time PCR proved to be a fast and reliable method to characterize lipomas and liposarcomas by quantification of MDM2 and CDK4 gene amplification. It is applicable to paraffin wax‐embedded tissues and could be useful when histological diagnosis is difficult. Copyright

MITOTIC CHECKPOINTS AND CHROMOSOME INSTABILITY ARE STRONG PREDICTORS OF CLINICAL OUTCOME IN GASTROINTESTINAL STROMAL TUMORS.

Purpose: The importance of KIT and PDGFRA mutations in the oncogenesis of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) is well established, but the genetic basis of GIST metastasis is poorly understood. We recently published a 67 gene expression prognostic signature related to genome complexity (CINSARC for Complexity INdex in SARComas) and asked whether it could predict outcome in GISTs. Experimental Design: We carried out genome and expression profiling on 67 primary untreated GISTs. Results: We show and validate here that it can predict metastasis in a new data set of 67 primary untreated GISTs. The gene whose expression was most strongly associated with metastasis was AURKA, but the AURKA locus was not amplified. Instead, we identified deletion of the p16 (CDKN2A) and retinoblastoma (RB1) genes as likely causal events leading to increased AURKA and CINSARC gene expression, to chromosome rearrangement, and ultimately to metastasis. On the basis of these findings, we established a Genomic Index that integrates the number and type of DNA copy number alterations. This index is a strong prognostic factor in GISTs. We show that CINSARC class, AURKA expression, and Genomic Index all outperform the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP) grading system in determining the prognosis of patients with GISTs. Interestingly, these signatures can identify poor prognosis patients in the group classified as intermediate-risk by the AFIP classification. Conclusions: We propose that a high Genomic Index determined by comparative genomic hybridization from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded samples could be used to identify AFIP intermediate-risk patients who would benefit from imatinib therapy. Clin Cancer Res; 18(3); 826–38. ©2011 AACR.

CTNNB1 mutation analysis is a useful tool for the diagnosis of desmoid tumors: a study of 260 desmoid tumors and 191 potential morphologic mimics

Desmoid tumors are benign monoclonal fibroblastic or myofibroblastic neoplasms, characterized by local invasiveness and high rates of recurrence. Desmoid tumors must be distinguished from benign fibroblastic and myofibroblastic lesions, as well as from low-grade sarcoma, which can appear histologically similar to desmoid tumors. This differential diagnosis can be very difficult, especially when diagnosis is based on a core needle biopsy. On the molecular level, most sporadic desmoid tumors are associated with mutations of the β-catenin gene (CTNNB1). A minority of desmoid tumors are associated with Gardner syndrome and mutations of the familial adenomatous polyposis gene. We identified the common CTNNB1 mutations associated with sporadic desmoid tumors by direct sequencing: in (i) 260 cases of typical desmoid tumors; and (ii) in 191 cases of spindle cell lesions, which can morphologically ‘mimic’ desmoid tumors. Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues were obtained via core needle biopsy (n=150) or open biopsy/surgical excision (n=301). Only 16 cases (4%) were not analyzable (Bouins fixed tissue). CTNNB1 mutations were observed in 223 of 254 (88%) of sporadic desmoid tumors. No CTNNB1 mutations were detected in all other lesions (n=175) studied. CTNNB1 sequencing can be easily and reliably done using tissues obtained via core needle biopsy. Detection of CTNNB1 mutations in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues among spindle cell lesions is proposed as a specific diagnostic tool for the diagnosis of desmoid tumors. This result has significant implications for patient care and management.