Dermawan, Josephine K T

AimsOssifying fibromyxoid tumour is a rare mesenchymal neoplasm predominantly affecting adults characterised by a multinodular growth pattern and the presence of a fibrous pseudocapsule with areas of ossification. Prompted by the recognition of a non‐ossifying ossifying fibromyxoid tumour with lipomatous differentiation which caused diagnostic difficulty, we sought to further explore cases of ossifying fibromyxoid tumour with non‐osseous heterologous elements.Methods and ResultsA search of our institutional and consultation archives revealed three additional cases that demonstrated lipomatous components and two cases with cartilaginous differentiation. RNA‐sequencing revealed fusions involving PHF1 (n = 4) or EPC1 (n = 1) in all (five of five) cases tested, including EPC1::PHC1 and JAZF1::PHF1 fusions, which have not been reported before in ossifying fibromyxoid tumour.ConclusionThese six cases expand the histomorphological spectrum of ossifying fibromyxoid tumour, introducing lipomatous differentiation as a hitherto undocumented feature. Awareness of these rare variants will ensure appropriate diagnosis and clinical management.

AbstractApplication of molecular testing in clinical practice has led to significant advances in the classification of soft tissue sarcomas. Despite remarkable progress, there are still challenging cases that remain unclassified. In this study, we present an unusual spindle cell sarcoma arising in the abdominal cavity of a 37‐year‐old female. An extensive panel of immunostains was nonspecific for a line of differentiation and the tumor was subjected to targeted RNA sequencing for further classification. The findings showed a novel WWTR1::AFF2 fusion, which was further confirmed by break‐apart FISH analysis for WWTR1 gene rearrangement. The tumor was attached to the wall of sigmoid colon and showed a highly cellular proliferation of plump spindle to epithelioid cells arranged in intersecting fascicles. Areas of extensive endometriosis were identified adjacent to the tumor. The immunoprofile was significant for reactivity with desmin, calponin, WT‐1, ER, and PR, while negative for CD10, SMA, caldesmon, pan‐keratin, ALK, CD117, and S100. The patient is alive and well after 11 months of follow‐up. The exact histogenesis of this sarcoma remains unclear, however, the presence of adjacent endometriosis and coexpression of WT1/ER/PR raises the possibility of an unusual endometrioid stromal sarcoma, occurring outside the GYN tract. Additional cases are needed to establish the recurrent potential of this fusion event and to better define its pathogenesis and clinical behavior.

AimsPRRX1–NCOA1‐rearranged fibroblastic tumour is a recently described, rare mesenchymal tumour. Only four cases have been previously reported. The aim of this article is to report six additional cases of this unusual mesenchymal neoplasm, with an emphasis on its differential diagnosis.Methods and resultsThe six cases were from three females and three males (age, 20–49 years; median, 42 years). Three tumours were located on the abdominal wall; two from the shoulder/axillary areas, and one on the lateral hip. All presented as slow‐growing subcutaneous nodules, ranging from 26 to 55 mm (median, 40 mm). The tumours consisted of circumscribed, variably cellular nodules composed of relatively bland plump spindled to epithelioid cells arranged singly, in cords, and occasionally in nests, embedded in hyalinised and collagenous stroma. Small hypocellular myxoid zones with ropey collagen fibres were present, as were irregularly dilated, gaping, crescent‐shaped or staghorn‐like thin‐walled vessels, best appreciated at the periphery. Immunohistochemistry for CD34, S100, MUC4 and STAT6 was consistently negative. RNA‐sequencing revealed PRRX1–NCOA1 fusions in all cases. Of the four cases with limited follow‐up (1.5–4 months), none recurred following local surgical excision.ConclusionsThe morphological features of PRRX1–NCOA1‐rearranged fibroblastic tumour overlap with those of RB1‐deficient soft‐tissue tumours, solitary fibrous tumour, and low‐grade fibromyxoid sarcoma/sclerosing epithelioid fibrosarcoma. This differential diagnosis can be resolved with a combination of careful morphological study and the application of a panel of immunostains, although molecular genetic study is most definitive. The natural history of PRRX1–NCOA1‐rearranged fibroblastic tumour appears to be quite favourable, although longer‐term study of a larger number of cases is warranted.