Cargando…

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

Background. The assessment of MDM2 gene amplification by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) has become a routine ancillary tool for diagnosing atypical lipomatous tumor (ALT)/well-differentiated liposarcoma and dedifferentiated liposarcoma (WDL/DDL) in specialist sarcoma units. We describe ou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Thway, Khin, Wang, Jayson, Swansbury, John, Min, Toon, Fisher, Cyril
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4355609/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25810689
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/812089
_version_ 1782360887097556992
author Thway, Khin
Wang, Jayson
Swansbury, John
Min, Toon
Fisher, Cyril
author_facet Thway, Khin
Wang, Jayson
Swansbury, John
Min, Toon
Fisher, Cyril
author_sort Thway, Khin
collection PubMed
description Background. The assessment of MDM2 gene amplification by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) has become a routine ancillary tool for diagnosing atypical lipomatous tumor (ALT)/well-differentiated liposarcoma and dedifferentiated liposarcoma (WDL/DDL) in specialist sarcoma units. We describe our experience of its utility at our tertiary institute. Methods. All routine histology samples in which MDM2 amplification was assessed with FISH over a 2-year period were included, and FISH results were correlated with clinical and histologic findings. Results. 365 samples from 347 patients had FISH for MDM2 gene amplification. 170 were positive (i.e., showed MDM2 gene amplification), 192 were negative, and 3 were technically unsatisfactory. There were 122 histologically benign cases showing a histology:FISH concordance rate of 92.6%, 142 WDL/DDL (concordance 96.5%), and 34 cases histologically equivocal for WDL (concordance 50%). Of 64 spindle cell/pleomorphic neoplasms (in which DDL was a differential diagnosis), 21.9% showed MDM2 amplification. Of the cases with discrepant histology and FISH, all but 3 had diagnoses amended following FISH results. For discrepancies of benign histology but positive FISH, lesions were on average larger, more frequently in “classical” (intra-abdominal or inguinal) sites for WDL/DDL and more frequently core biopsies. Discrepancies of malignant histology but negative FISH were smaller, less frequently in “classical” sites but again more frequently core biopsies. Conclusions. FISH has a high correlation rate with histology for cases with firm histologic diagnoses of lipoma or WDL/DDL. It is a useful ancillary diagnostic tool in histologically equivocal cases, particularly in WDL lacking significant histologic atypia or DDL without corresponding WDL component, especially in larger tumors, those from intra-abdominal or inguinal sites or core biopsies. There is a significant group of well-differentiated adipocytic neoplasms which are difficult to diagnose on morphology alone, in which FISH for MDM2 amplification is diagnostically contributory.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4355609
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43556092015-03-25 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 Thway, Khin Wang, Jayson Swansbury, John Min, Toon Fisher, Cyril Sarcoma Research Article Background. The assessment of MDM2 gene amplification by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) has become a routine ancillary tool for diagnosing atypical lipomatous tumor (ALT)/well-differentiated liposarcoma and dedifferentiated liposarcoma (WDL/DDL) in specialist sarcoma units. We describe our experience of its utility at our tertiary institute. Methods. All routine histology samples in which MDM2 amplification was assessed with FISH over a 2-year period were included, and FISH results were correlated with clinical and histologic findings. Results. 365 samples from 347 patients had FISH for MDM2 gene amplification. 170 were positive (i.e., showed MDM2 gene amplification), 192 were negative, and 3 were technically unsatisfactory. There were 122 histologically benign cases showing a histology:FISH concordance rate of 92.6%, 142 WDL/DDL (concordance 96.5%), and 34 cases histologically equivocal for WDL (concordance 50%). Of 64 spindle cell/pleomorphic neoplasms (in which DDL was a differential diagnosis), 21.9% showed MDM2 amplification. Of the cases with discrepant histology and FISH, all but 3 had diagnoses amended following FISH results. For discrepancies of benign histology but positive FISH, lesions were on average larger, more frequently in “classical” (intra-abdominal or inguinal) sites for WDL/DDL and more frequently core biopsies. Discrepancies of malignant histology but negative FISH were smaller, less frequently in “classical” sites but again more frequently core biopsies. Conclusions. FISH has a high correlation rate with histology for cases with firm histologic diagnoses of lipoma or WDL/DDL. It is a useful ancillary diagnostic tool in histologically equivocal cases, particularly in WDL lacking significant histologic atypia or DDL without corresponding WDL component, especially in larger tumors, those from intra-abdominal or inguinal sites or core biopsies. There is a significant group of well-differentiated adipocytic neoplasms which are difficult to diagnose on morphology alone, in which FISH for MDM2 amplification is diagnostically contributory. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2015 2015-02-25 /pmc/articles/PMC4355609/ /pubmed/25810689 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/812089 Text en Copyright © 2015 Khin Thway et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Thway, Khin
Wang, Jayson
Swansbury, John
Min, Toon
Fisher, Cyril
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
title 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
title_full 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
title_fullStr 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
title_full_unstemmed 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
title_short 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
title_sort 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
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4355609/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25810689
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/812089
work_keys_str_mv AT thwaykhin fluorescenceinsituhybridizationformdm2amplificationasaroutineancillarydiagnostictoolforsuspectedwelldifferentiatedanddedifferentiatedliposarcomasexperienceatatertiarycenter
AT wangjayson fluorescenceinsituhybridizationformdm2amplificationasaroutineancillarydiagnostictoolforsuspectedwelldifferentiatedanddedifferentiatedliposarcomasexperienceatatertiarycenter
AT swansburyjohn fluorescenceinsituhybridizationformdm2amplificationasaroutineancillarydiagnostictoolforsuspectedwelldifferentiatedanddedifferentiatedliposarcomasexperienceatatertiarycenter
AT mintoon fluorescenceinsituhybridizationformdm2amplificationasaroutineancillarydiagnostictoolforsuspectedwelldifferentiatedanddedifferentiatedliposarcomasexperienceatatertiarycenter
AT fishercyril fluorescenceinsituhybridizationformdm2amplificationasaroutineancillarydiagnostictoolforsuspectedwelldifferentiatedanddedifferentiatedliposarcomasexperienceatatertiarycenter