The utility of MDM2 and CDK4 immunohistochemistry in needle biopsy interpretation of lipomatous tumours: a study of 21 Tru-Cut biopsy cases

Liposarcoma Involving Serous Fluid Cavities-A Case Series Illustrating Clinical Implications and the Diagnostic Role of Exfoliative Cytology

Introduction: Cytological diagnosis of sarcomas requires detailed cytomorphological assessment and integration of immunocytochemistry and/or molecular testing. The role of exfoliative cytology, as compared to aspiration cytology, is less understood. This case series describes well-differentiated/dedifferentiated liposarcomas in effusions, with cytomorphological features, ancillary test results and clinical outcomes detailed. Methods: A computerized search of the department pathology archives was performed for sarcomatous effusions with histological diagnosis or clinical history of well-differentiated/dedifferentiated liposarcoma. Clinical progress, cytology slides, immunocytochemistry and molecular test results were reviewed. Results: Six patients were identified. In 5 patients with clinical follow up, 4 (80%) were deceased within 5 months of malignant effusion. One patient was alive with 12 years disease-free survival after radical resection with adjuvant radiotherapy. Three patients showed dedifferentiation on histology, and high-grade (dedifferentiated) tumor cells were present in effusion cytology of 2 patients. Two showed well-differentiated components only on biopsy, but high-grade (dedifferentiated) tumor cells were identified in cytology. The high-grade tumor cells displayed marked nuclear irregularity, enlargement, size variation, with macronucleoli and multinucleation. Well-differentiated lipomatous components were demonstrated in 4 patients (66.7%), comprising of multivacuolated lipoblasts and atypical lipocytes. CDK4 and MDM2 immunoreactivity in all 3 cases with cell blocks, and CDK4 and MDM2 amplification in one were successfully demonstrated. Conclusion: Lipomatous and dedifferentiated components can be sampled and cytomorphologically identified on effusion fluids of liposarcomas, with sufficient cellularity for immunocytochemistry and molecular testing. Although generally associated with poor prognosis, long disease-free survival with sarcomatous effusion is possible with radical surgery and adjuvant treatment.

Expression of FRS2 in atypical lipomatous tumor/well-differentiated liposarcoma and dedifferentiated liposarcoma: an immunohistochemical analysis of 182 cases with genetic data

Background

The fibroblast growth factor receptor substrate 2 (FRS2) gene is located close to MDM2 and CDK4 within the 12q13-15 chromosomal region. FRS2 gene was recently found to be consistently amplified in atypical lipomatous tumor (ALT)/well-differentiated liposarcoma (WDL) and dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDL), suggesting the detection of FRS2 amplification could be a diagnostic tool for ALT/WDL/DDLs. However, the expression of FRS2 protein and diagnostic value of FRS2 immunohistochemistry (IHC) has not been evaluated in a large cohort of ALT/WDL/DDLs.

Methods

A SNOMED search of hospital surgical pathology files from January 2007 to July 2020 identified 182 ALT/WDL/DDLs with available materials. FRS2 fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and IHC were performed on 182 ALT/WDL/DDLs and 64 control samples. The expression of FRS2 was also compared with that of classic immunomarkers (MDM2 and CDK4) of this tumor entity.

Results

This study included 91 ALT/WDLs and 91 DDLs. The FISH results showed 172 of 182 (94.5%) cases were FRS2-amplified, and 10 cases were FRS2-nonamplified. Immunostaining results showed 171 (94.0%) ALT/WDL/DDLs were positive for FRS2 and 11 cases (6.0%) were FRS2-immunonegative. In 172 FRS2-amplified cases, 166 (96.5%) were FRS2-immunopositive, and 6 (3.5%) were negative. Among 10 FRS2-nonamplified ALT/WDL/DDL cases, 5 cases were FRS2-immunonegative, and 5 tumors displayed 1+ staining for this marker. In 64 control cases, none of them exhibited FRS2 amplification. Forty-seven (73.5%) control cases were negative for FRS2 immunostaining, while 17 cases (26.5%) were FRS2-immunopositive. Fifteen of these false positive samples (15/17, 88.2%) showed 1+ positivity and only 2 cases (2/17, 11.8%) displayed 2+ positivity. In ALT/WDL/DDLs, the sensitivity of FRS2 immunostaining was slightly lower than MDM2 (FRS2 vs. MDM2: 94.0% vs 100.0%) and CDK4 (FRS2 vs. CDK4: 94.0% vs 97.0%). However, the specificity of FRS2 (73.5%) was slightly higher than that of MDM2 (67.8%) and CDK4 (64.4%).

Conclusion

This study indicated that FRS2 IHC had relatively good consistency with FRS2 FISH, suggesting that FRS2 immunostaining could be utilized as an additional screening tool for the diagnosis of ALT/WDL/DDL. It must be emphasized that MDM2/CDK4/FRS2 especially MDM2 FISH remains the gold standard and the most recommended method to diagnose this entity.

Diagnostic utility of p16, CDK4, and MDM2 as an immunohistochemical panel in distinguishing well-differentiated and dedifferentiated liposarcomas from other adipocytic tumors. Am J Surg Pathol. 2012;36:462-469. [PMID: 22301498 DOI: 10.1097/pas.0b013e3182417330]

Adipocytic tumors are the most common type of soft tissue neoplasms. Distinguishing atypical lipomatous tumor-well-differentiated liposarcoma (WDL) from benign adipocytic neoplasms and dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDL) from pleomorphic or myxoid liposarcoma (LPS) can be difficult. WDL and DDL characteristically harbor amplifications of the MDM2 and CDK4 cell cycle oncogenes with protein overexpression and can also overexpress the cell cycle regulator p16. We assessed the utility of immunohistochemistry for CDK4, MDM2, and p16 in the routine histopathologic diagnosis of WDL/DDL from other adipocytic tumors. Immunohistochemistry for the trio of markers was performed on 216 adipocytic neoplasms (31 WDLs, 57 DDLs, 11 myxoid LPS, 2 pleomorphic LPS, 91 lipomas (including intramuscular, fibro, angio, and ossifying subtypes), 18 spindle/pleomorphic lipomas, and 6 hibernomas. Sixty-eight percent of WDLs and 72% of DDLs expressed all 3 antigens, whereas 100% of WDLs and 93% of DDLs expressed at least 2 antigens. The sensitivity and specificity of the trio for detecting WDLs/DDLs were 71% and 98%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of CDK4 for detecting WDLs/DDLs were 86% and 89%, those of MDM2 were 86% and 74%, and those of p16 were 93% and 92%, respectively. The immunohistochemical trio of CDK4, MDM2, and p16 is a useful ancillary diagnostic tool that provides strong support in distinguishing WDLs and DDLs from other adipocytic neoplasms and is potentially more sensitive than previously assessed combinations of CDK4 and MDM2. p16 was the most sensitive and specific marker for detecting WDL/DDL, and the combination of CDK4 and p16 is of more discriminatory value than the combination of either with MDM2, the least sensitive and specific of the 3 markers.