Differentiating and Categorizing of Liposarcoma and Synovial Sarcoma Neoplasms by Fluorescence in Situ Hybridization

Document Type: Original Research

Authors

1 Dept. of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Cancer Research Center, Cancer Institute, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

2 Dept. of Biology, Faculty of Sciences, International Pardis, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran

3 Dept. of Medical Genetics, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

4 Dept. of Pathology, Cancer Research Center, Cancer Institute, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

5 Dept. of Pathology, Shariati Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

6 Hematology, Oncology and Stem Cell Transplantation Research center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Background & Objective: Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) constitute an uncommon and heterogeneous group of tumors of mesenchymal origin and various cytogenetic abnormalities ranging from distinct genomic rearrangements, such as chromosomal translocations and amplifications, to more intricate rearrangements involving multiple chromosomes. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) can be used to identify these chromosomal translocations and amplifications, and sub classify STS precisely. The current study aimed at investigating the usefulness of FISH, as a diagnostic ancillary aid, to detect cytogenetic abnormalities such as MDM2 (murine double minute 2) amplification and CHOP(C/EBP homologous protein) rearrangement in liposarcoma, as well as SYT (synaptotagmin) rearrangement in synovial sarcoma.
Methods: The FISH technique was used to analyze 17 specimens of liposarcoma for MDM2 amplification and CHOP rearrangement, and 10 specimens of synovial sarcoma for SYT rearrangement. The subtypes of liposarcoma and synovial sarcomas were reclassified according to the FISH results and compared with those of the respective histological findings.
Results: According to the FISH results in 17 liposarcoma cases, well-differentiated liposarcoma(WDLPS), dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDLPS), and myxoidliposarcoma (MLPS)subtypes were 41%, 53%, and 6%, respectively. In different subtypes of liposarcoma, a total of 30% mismatches were observed between pathologic and cytogenetic results. According to the histological findings from FISH analysis, SYT rearrangement was found only in three out of 10 (30%) synovial sarcomas.
Conclusion: The detection of cytogenetic abnormalities in patients with liposarcoma and synovial sarcoma by FISH technique provides an important objective tool to confirm sarcoma diagnosis and sub classification of specific sarcoma subtypes in such patients. 

Keywords

Main Subjects


1.Fletcher CD, Unni KK, Mertens F. Pathology and genetics of tumours of soft tissue and bone. World Health Organization classification of tumours. 2013.

2.Thway K, Fisher C. Histopathological diagnostic discrepancies in soft tissue tumours referred to a specialist centre. Sarcoma. 2009;2009.

3.Ray-Coquard I, Montesco M, Coindre J, Dei Tos A, Lurkin A, Ranchère-Vince D, et al. Sarcoma: concordance between initial diagnosis and centralized expert review in a population-based study within three European regions. Annals of oncology. 2012;23(9):2442-9.

4.Singer S, editor New diagnostic modalities in soft tissue sarcoma. Seminars in surgical oncology; 1999: Wiley Online Library.

5.Bovée JV, Hogendoorn PC. Molecular pathology of sarcomas: concepts and clinical implications. Virchows Archiv. 2010;456(2):193-9.

6.Toro JR, Travis LB, Wu HJ, Zhu K, Fletcher CD, Devesa SS. Incidence patterns of soft tissue sarcomas, regardless of primary site, in the surveillance, epidemiology and end results program, 1978–2001: an analysis of 26,758 cases. International Journal of Cancer. 2006;119(12):2922-30.

7.Fletcher CD, Organization WH, Cancer IAfRo. WHO classification of tumours of soft tissue and bone: IARC press; 2013.

8.Kindblom L-G. Lipomatous tumors—how we have reached our present views, what controversies remain and why we still face diagnostic problems: a tribute to Dr Franz Enzinger. Advances in anatomic pathology. 2006;13(6):279-85.

9.Suurmeijer A, de Bruijn D, Geurts van Kessel A, Miettinen M. Synovial sarcoma. WHO Classification of Tumours of Soft Tissue and Bone Lyon: IARC. 2013:213-5.

10.Rieker RJ, Weitz J, Lehner B, Egerer G, Mueller A, Kasper B, et al. Genomic profiling reveals subsets of dedifferentiated liposarcoma to follow separate molecular pathways. Virchows Archiv. 2010;456(3):277-85.

11.Lewis JJ, Antonescu CR, Leung DH, Blumberg D, Healey JH, Woodruff JM, et al. Synovial sarcoma: a multivariate analysis of prognostic factors in 112 patients with primary localized tumors of the extremity. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2000;18(10):2087-94.

12.Coindre JM, Pelmus M, Hostein I, Lussan C, Bui BN, Guillou L. Should molecular testing be required for diagnosing synovial sarcoma? Cancer. 2003;98(12):2700-7.

13.Guillou L, Coindre J-M, Gallagher G, Terrier P, Gebhard S, Somerhausen NDSA, et al. Detection of the synovial sarcoma translocation t (X; 18)(SYT; SSX) in paraffin-embedded tissues using reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction: a reliable and powerful diagnostic tool for pathologists: a molecular analysis of 221 mesenchymal tumors fixed in different fixatives. Human pathology. 2001;32(1):105-12.

14.De Vreeze RS, de Jong D, Nederlof PM, Ariaens A, Tielen IH, Frenken L, et al. Added value of molecular biological analysis in diagnosis and clinical management of liposarcoma: a 30-year single-institution experience. Annals of surgical oncology. 2010;17(3):686-93.

15.Weaver J, Downs-Kelly E, Goldblum JR, Turner S, Kulkarni S, Tubbs RR, et al. Fluorescence in situ hybridization for MDM2 gene amplification as a diagnostic tool in lipomatous neoplasms. Modern Pathology. 2008;21(8):943-9.

16.Neuville A, Ranchère-Vince D, Dei Tos AP, Montesco MC, Hostein I, Toffolatti L, et al. Impact of molecular analysis on the final sarcoma diagnosis: a study on 763 cases collected during a European epidemiological study. The American journal of surgical pathology. 2013;37(8):1259-68.

17.Dei Tos AP, Doglioni C, Piccinin S, Sciot R, Furlanetto A, Boiocchi M, et al. Coordinated expression and amplification of the MDM2, CDK4, and HMGI‐C genes in atypical lipomatous tumours. The Journal of pathology. 2000;190(5):531-6.

18.Cho J, Lee SE, Choi Y-L. Diagnostic Value of MDM2 and DDIT3 Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization in Liposarcoma Classification: A Single-Institution Experience. Korean journal of pathology. 2012;46(2):115-22.

19.Sirvent N, Coindre J-M, Maire G, Hostein I, Keslair F, Guillou L, et al. 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. The American journal of surgical pathology. 2007;31(10):1476-89.

20.Saboorian MH, Ashfaq R, Vandersteenhoven JJ, Schneider NR. Cytogenetics as an adjunct in establishing a definitive diagnosis of synovial sarcoma by fine‐needle aspiration. Cancer Cytopathology. 1997;81(3):187-92.

21.Ladanyi M, Antonescu CR, Leung DH, Woodruff JM, Kawai A, Healey JH, et al. Impact of SYT-SSX Fusion Type on the Clinical Behavior of Synovial Sarcoma A Multi-Institutional Retrospective Study of 243 Patients. Cancer research. 2002;62(1):135-40.

22.Surace C, Panagopoulos I, Pålsson E, Rocchi M, Mandahl N, Mertens F. A novel FISH assay for SS18–SSX fusion type in synovial sarcoma. Laboratory investigation. 2004;84(9):1185-92.

23.Ducimetière F, Lurkin A, Ranchère-Vince D, Decouvelaere A-V, Péoc'h M, Istier L, et al. Incidence of sarcoma histotypes and molecular subtypes in a prospective epidemiological study with central pathology review and molecular testing. PloS one. 2011;6(8):e20294.

24.Conyers R, Young S, Thomas DM. Liposarcoma: molecular genetics and therapeutics. Sarcoma. 2010;2011.

25.Sreekantaiah C, Ladanyi M, Rodriguez E, Chaganti R. Chromosomal aberrations in soft tissue tumors. Relevance to diagnosis, classification, and molecular mechanisms. The American journal of pathology. 1994;144(6):1121.

26.Haldar M, Randall RL, Capecchi MR. Synovial sarcoma: from genetics to genetic-based animal modeling. Clinical orthopaedics and related research. 2008;466(9):2156-67.

27.Sugita S, Asanuma H, Hasegawa T. Diagnostic use of fluorescence in situ hybridization in expert review in a phase 2 study of trabectedin monotherapy in patients with advanced, translocation-related sarcoma. Diagnostic Pathology. 2016;11(1):1.

 

28.Thway K, Wang J, Swansbury J, Min T, Fisher C. Fluorescence in situ hybridization for MDM2 amplification as a routine ancillary diagnostic tool for suspected well-differentiated and dedifferentiated liposarcomas: experience at a tertiary center. Sarcoma. 2015;2015.

29.Italiano A, Di Mauro I, Rapp J, Pierron G, Auger N, Alberti L, et al. Clinical effect of molecular methods in sarcoma diagnosis (GENSARC): a prospective, multicentre, observational study. The Lancet Oncology. 2016;17(4):532-8.

 

How to Cite This Article:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

30.Horn H, Allmanritter J, Doglioni C, Marx A, Müller J, Gattenlöhner S, et al. Fluorescence in situ analysis of soft tissue tumor associated genetic alterations in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue. Pathology-Research and Practice. 2014;210(12):804-11.

31.Guan Z, Yu X, Wang H, Zhang J, Cao J, Li G, et al. Advances in the targeted therapy of liposarcoma. Onco Targets Ther. 2015;8:125-36.