Explore the vast range of titles available.

Epithelioid hemangioendothelioma is a low-grade malignant vascular tumor with an intermediate clinical behavior between benign hemangiomas and high-grade angiosarcomas. Pathologic or molecular factors to predict this clinical heterogeneity are not well defined. A WWTR1-CAMTA1 fusion is present in most classic epithelioid hemangioendothelioma, regardless of their clinical behavior, suggesting that additional genetic abnormalities might be responsible in driving a more aggressive biology. A small subset of cases show distinct morphology and are characterized genetically by a YAP1-TFE3 fusion. Two histologic grades have been described in classic epithelioid hemangioendothelioma of the soft tissue. However, proposed criteria do not apply to other clinical presentations and have not been assessed in the YAP1-TFE3 positive tumors. Furthermore, no previous studies have compared the survival of these two molecular subsets. In this study we investigate the clinicopathologic and molecular findings of a large cohort of 93 translocation-positive epithelioid hemangioendothelioma managed at our institution. Patient characteristics, histologic features, treatment outcomes, and genetic abnormalities were investigated and these factors were correlated with overall survival. In 18 patients (15 with WWTR1-CAMTA1 and 3 with YAP1-TFE3 ) Memorial Sloan Kettering-IMPACT targeted DNA sequencing was performed to identify secondary genetic alterations showing more than half of tumors had a genetic alteration beyond the disease-defining gene fusion. Patients with conventional epithelioid hemangioendothelioma with WWTR1-CAMTA1 fusion had a less favorable outcome compared with the YAP1-TFE3 subset, the 5-year overall survival being 59% versus 86%, respectively. Soft tissue epithelioid hemangioendothelioma were frequently solitary, followed an uneventful clinical course being often managed with curative surgery. Multifocality, pleural involvement, lymph node or distant metastases had a significantly worse outcome. Patients with pleural disease or lymph node metastases had an aggressive clinical course akin to high-grade sarcomas, with 22% and 30%, respectively, alive at 5 years, compared with >70% survival rate in patients lacking these two adverse factors.

Background Hepatic epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE) is an extremely rare tumour. The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term prognosis and its relationship with treatment modalities. Methods From March 2014 to June 2024, a total of 234 patients with histologically confirmed hepatic EHE were treated or followed up regularly by our team. The patients’ clinical data at the time of diagnosis and initial treatment modalities were retrospectively collected. Kaplan–Meier curves were constructed to determine overall survival (OS). To explore prognostic factors and treatment outcomes, univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were developed. Results A total of 228 patients were ultimately included. The median age of the cohort was 41 years. For all patients, the OS of 1-, 3- and 5-year were 96.2%, 87.9% and 84.9%, respectively. For patients who underwent liver transplantation (LT), the OS of 1- and 3-year were 62.5% and 25%, respectively. No difference was found in the OS between patients who received surgical therapy and those who did not (1-year: 100% vs. 96.9%; 3-year: 90.1% vs. 91.5%; 5-year: 87.2% vs. 88.2%; P  = 0.891). In the multivariable analysis, age ≥ 60 years [HR (95% CI): 4.207 (1.266–13.973), P  = 0.019], the size of the largest lesion > 10 cm [HR (95% CI): 12.140 (1.419–103.872), P  = 0.023] and LT [HR (95% CI): 5.502 (1.343–22.536), P  = 0.018] were poor prognostic factors. Conclusions Compared with nonsurgical therapy, surgical therapy has no advantage in terms of long-term survival. The role of LT in the management of hepatic EHE should be reevaluated. Age ≥ 60 years and the size of the largest lesion > 10 cm are poor prognostic factors.

YAP1-TFE3- fused hemangioendothelioma is an extremely rare malignant vascular tumor. We present the largest multi-institutional clinicopathologic study of YAP1-TFE3- fused hemangioendothelioma to date. The 24 cases of YAP1-TFE3- fused hemangioendothelioma showed a female predominance (17 female, 7 male) across a wide age range (20–78 years old, median 44). Tumors were most commonly located in soft tissue (50%), followed by bone (29%), lung (13%), and liver (8%), ranging from 3 to 115 mm in size (median 40 mm). About two-thirds presented with multifocal disease, including 7 cases with distant organ metastasis. Histopathologically, we describe three dominant architectural patterns: solid sheets of coalescing nests, pseudoalveolar and (pseudo)vasoformative pattern, and discohesive strands and clusters of cells set in a myxoid to myxohyaline stroma. These patterns were present in variable proportions across different tumors and often coexisted within the same tumor. The dominant cytomorphology (88%) was large epithelioid cells with abundant, glassy eosinophilic to vacuolated cytoplasm, prominent nucleoli and well-demarcated cell borders. Multinucleated or binucleated cells, prominent admixed erythrocytic and lymphocytic infiltrates, and intratumoral fat were frequently present. Immunohistochemically, ERG, CD31, and TFE3 were consistently expressed, while expression of CD34 (83%) and cytokeratin AE1/AE3 (20%) was variable. CAMTA1 was negative in all but one case. All cases were confirmed by molecular testing to harbor YAP1-TFE3 gene fusions: majority with YAP1 exon 1 fused to TFE3 exon 4 (88%), or less commonly, TFE3 exon 6 (12%). Most patients (88%) were treated with primary surgical resection. Over a follow-up period of 4–360 months (median 36 months) in 17 cases, 35% of patients remained alive without disease, and 47% survived many years with stable, albeit multifocal and/or metastatic disease. Five-year progression-free survival probability was 88%. We propose categorizing YAP1-TFE3- fused hemangioendothelioma as a distinct disease entity given its unique clinical and histopathologic characteristics in comparison to conventional epithelioid hemangioendothelioma.

Although benign hemangiomas are among the most common diagnoses amid connective tissue tumors, sarcomas showing endothelial differentiation (ie, angiosarcoma and epithelioid hemangioendothelioma) represent under 1% of all sarcoma diagnoses, and thus it is likely that fewer than 500 people in the United States are affected each year. Differential diagnosis of malignant vascular tumors can be often quite challenging, either at the low end of the spectrum, distinguishing an epithelioid hemangioendothelioma from an epithelioid hemangioma, or at the high-grade end of the spectrum, between an angiosarcoma and a malignant epithelioid hemangioendothelioma. Within this differential diagnosis both clinico-radiological features (ie, size and multifocality) and immunohistochemical markers (ie, expression of endothelial markers) are often similar and cannot distinguish between benign and malignant vascular lesions. Molecular ancillary tests have long been needed for a more objective diagnosis and classification of malignant vascular tumors, particularly within the epithelioid phenotype. As significant advances have been recently made in understanding the genetic signatures of vascular tumors, this review will take the opportunity to provide a detailed update on these findings. Specifically, this article will focus on the following aspects: (1) pathological and molecular features of epithelioid hemangioendothelioma, including the more common WWTR1–CAMTA1 fusion, as well as the recently described YAP1–TFE3 fusion, identified in a morphological variant of epithelioid hemangioendothelioma; (2) discuss the heterogeneity of angiosarcoma clinical, morphological and genetic spectrum, with particular emphasis of MYC and FLT4 gene amplification in radiation-induced angiosarcoma; and (3) provide a practical guide in the differential diagnosis of epithelioid vascular tumors using molecular testing.

Integration of morphological, immunohistochemical, and molecular methods is often necessary for the precise diagnosis and optimal clinical management of sarcomas. We have validated and implemented a clinical molecular diagnostic assay, MSK- Fusion Solid, for detection of gene fusions in solid tumors, including sarcomas. Starting with RNA extracted from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor material, this targeted RNA sequencing assay utilizes anchored multiplex PCR to detect oncogenic fusion transcripts involving 62 genes known to be recurrently rearranged in solid tumors including sarcomas without prior knowledge of fusion partners. From 1/2016 to 1/2018, 192 bone and soft tissue tumors were submitted for MSK- Fusion Solid analysis and 96% (184/192) successfully passed all the pre-sequencing quality control parameters and sequencing steps. These sarcomas encompass 24 major tumor types, including 175 soft tissue tumors and 9 osteosarcomas. Ewing and Ewing-like sarcomas, rhabdomyosarcoma, and sarcoma-not otherwise specified were the three most common tumor types. Diagnostic in-frame fusion transcripts were detected in 43% of cases, including 3% (6/184) with novel fusion partners, specifically TRPS1-PLAG1 , VCP-TFE3 , MYLK-BRAF , FUS-TFCP2 , and ACTB-FOSB , the latter in two cases of pseudomyogenic hemangioendothelioma, representing a novel observation in this sarcoma. Our experience shows that this targeted RNA sequencing assay performs in a robust and sensitive fashion on RNA extracted from most routine clinical specimens of sarcomas thereby facilitating precise diagnosis and providing opportunities for novel fusion partner discovery.

Epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE), is an uncommon, intermediate-grade malignant vascular tumor that can manifest in diverse organs, including the liver, lungs, and bones. Given its unique malignancy profile and rarity, there lacks a consensus on a standardized treatment protocol for EHE, particularly for hepatic epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (HEHE). This study aims to elucidate factors influencing the clinical prognosis of EHE by analyzing data from the SEER database, complemented with insights from a departmental cohort of 9 HEHE cases. Through this, we hope to shed light on potential clinical outcomes and therapeutic strategies for HEHE. Using SEER data from 22 registries, we analyzed 313 liver cancer patients with ICD-O-3 9130 and 9133 histology. Twelve variables were examined using Cox regression and mlr3 machine learning. Significant variables were identified and compared. Clinical data, imaging characteristics, and treatment methods of nine patients from our cohort were also presented. In univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses, Age, Sex, Year of diagnosis, Surgery of primary site, Chemotherapy, and Median household income were closely related to survival outcomes. Among the ten survival-related machine learning models, CoxPH, Flexible, Mboost, and Gamboost stood out based on Area Under the Curve(AUC), Decision Curve Analysis(DCA), and Calibration Curve Metrics. In the feature importance analysis of these four selected models, Age and Surgery of primary site were consistently identified as the most critical factors influencing prognosis. Additionally, the clinical data of nine patients from our cohort not only demonstrated unique imaging characteristics of HEHE but also underscored the importance of surgical intervention. For patients with resectable HEHE, surgical treatment is currently a highly important therapeutic approach.

Epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE) is an ultra-rare sarcoma, marked by distinctive molecular and pathological features and with a variable clinical behavior. Its natural history is still partially understood, reliable prognostic and predictive factors are lacking and many questions are still open on the optimal management. In the context of EURACAN, a prospective registry specifically dedicated to EHE was developed and launched with the aim of providing, through high-quality prospective data collection, a better understanding of this disease. Registry-based cohort study including only new cases of patients with a pathological and molecularly confirmed diagnosis of EHE. To improve the understanding of EHE natural history, validate and identify new prognostic and predictive factors, clarify the activity and efficacy of currently available treatment options, describe treatment pattern. Settings and participantsIt is an hospital-based registry established in centers with expertise in EHE including adult patients with a new pathological and molecularly confirmed diagnosis of EHE starting from the 1st December 2023. The characteristics of each patient in the facility who meets the above-mentioned inclusion criteria will be collected prospectively and longitudinally with follow-up at cancer progression and / or cancer relapse or patient death. It is a secondary use of data which will be collected from the clinical records. The data collected for the registry will not entail further examinations or admissions to the facility and/or additional appointments to those normally provided for routine patient follow-up. VariablesFull details on patients and disease features, treatment and outcome will be collected, according to common clinical practice guidelines developed and shared with all the contributing centers. In addition, data on potential confounders (e.g. comorbidity; functional status etc.) will also be collected. Statistical methodsThe data analyses will include descriptive statistics and analytical analyses. Multivariable Cox's proportional hazards model and Hazard ratios (HR) for all-cause or cause-specific mortality will be used to determine independent predictors of overall survival, recurrence and progression. The registry has been joined by 21 sarcoma reference centers across EU and UK, covering 10 countries. Patients' recruitment started in December 2023. The estimated completion date is December 2033 upon agreement on the achievement of all the registry objectives. The already established collaboration and participation of EHE patient's associations involved in the project will help in promoting the registry and fostering accrual.

Perivascular epithelioid cell tumors (PEComas) belong to a family of rare mesenchymal tumors composed of histologically and immunohistochemically distinctive perivascular epithelioid cells. Li–Fraumeni syndrome (LFS), an autosomal dominant cancer predisposition syndrome, is caused by a germline variant of the tumor suppressor gene TP53. Here, we report the case of a 20-year-old woman with LFS who developed a PEComa of the liver. She was suspected to have LFS because she had developed osteosarcoma (OS) of the femur along with a concurrent transitional liver cell tumor in the right liver lobe at the age of 8 years. She also tested positive for the germline TP53 missense variant c.722 C > T (p.Ser241Phe). She concurrently experienced recurrence of OS and a new-onset liver tumor at the age of 20 years. Thereafter, microwave ablation was performed for the liver tumor because the Magnetic resonance imaging features suggested that the tumor was a hepatocellular carcinoma. Post-ablation biopsy showed that the tumor cells were spindle-shaped and possessed eosinophilic cytoplasm. Immunohistochemistry revealed that the tumor cells expressed HMB45 and focal alpha-smooth muscle actin. Labeling for S100 protein and cytokeratin-AE1/AE3 yielded negative results. Therefore, a diagnosis of PEComa of the liver was made. Among the ten PEComas reported in patients with Li-Fraumeni syndrome so far, all PEComas except the current case were surgically resected, and no cases of recurrence were documented in the follow-up period. Six of the ten PEComas were located in the liver. We think that the possibility of PEComa should be considered when a liver tumor develops in patients with LFS.

Background Hepatic epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (HEHE) is a malignant vascular tumor known for its rarity. The different types of this hepatic tumor (single, multiple-nodular or diffused) indicate different prognosis and treatment plans. However, the heterogenic clinical manifestation creates a dilemma and a wide range of challenges when attending to HEHE patients. This review addresses the unique profile and clinical challenges that complicate the diagnosis and treatment of HEHE while focusing on current therapeutic strategies and their limitations. Main text The unclear etiology is a challenging feature of HEHE. The exact involvement of potential risk factors and mechanism of development are still undefined. Relevant genetic alterations like WWTR1–CAMTA1 fusion have been investigated; however, they are only applicable as diagnostic markers and their influence on therapeutic efficacy is largely unknown. Other characteristics include asymptomatic manifestation, lack of unique hepatic functional alterations, high rates of misdiagnosis and late-stage identification when metastases already exist. Currently, tissue biopsy is the main tool to establish a definite diagnosis but is challenged with the limited awareness to suspect HEHE at early stages and the lack of relevant guidelines due to the rarity and the insufficiency of relevant research. The absence of treatment guidelines is the greatest challenge of HEHE. Generally, Surgical approaches are recommended due to the benefits of prolonged survival and enhanced prognosis. Nonetheless, only a minority of patients are eligible for resections while liver transplants are faced with severe insufficiency of donor organs and long wait-lists. On the other hand, a variety of non-surgical treatments (like anti-angiogenic agents, interferon alpha-2B and sirolimus) are presented with a promising potential. However, relevant studies are challenged with limited sample-sizes and lack of prospective designs. Conclusion Regardless to decades passing since its discovery, HEHE still creates a dilemma due to its challenging clinical profile and lack of treatment guidelines. Raising awareness of HEHE in clinical practices improves the ability to diagnose this rare tumor at early stages and develop stronger research strategies and treatment guidelines to regulate the medical care provided to HEHE patients.

Melanomas that have histopathologic features that overlap with those of Spitz nevus are referred to as spitzoid melanomas. However, the diagnostic concept is used inconsistently and genomic analyses suggest it is a heterogeneous category. Spitz tumors, the spectrum of melanocytic neoplasms extending from Spitz nevi to their malignant counterpart Spitz melanoma, are defined in the 2018 WHO classification of skin tumors by the presence of specific genetic alterations, such as kinase fusions or HRAS mutations. It is unclear what fraction of “spitzoid melanomas” defined solely by their histopathologic features belong to the category of Spitz melanoma or to other melanoma subtypes. We assembled a cohort of 25 spitzoid melanomas diagnosed at a single institution over an 8-year period and performed high-coverage DNA sequencing of 480 cancer related genes. Transcriptome wide RNA sequencing was performed for select cases. Only nine cases (36%) had genetic alterations characteristic of Spitz melanoma, including HRAS mutation or fusion involving BRAF , ALK , NTRK1 , or MAP3K8 . The remaining cases were divided into those with an MAPK activating mutation and those without an MAPK activating mutation. Both Spitz melanoma and spitzoid melanomas in which an MAPK-activating mutation could not be identified tended to occur in younger patients on skin with little solar elastosis, infrequently harbored TERT promoter mutations, and had a lower burden of pathogenic mutations than spitzoid melanomas with non-Spitz MAPK-activating mutations. The MAPK-activating mutations identified affected non-V600 residues of BRAF as well as NRAS, MAP2K1/2, NF1, and KIT, while BRAF V600 mutations, the most common mutations in melanomas of the WHO low-CSD category, were entirely absent. While the “spitzoid melanomas” comprising our cohort were enriched for bona fide Spitz melanomas, the majority of melanomas fell outside of the genetically defined category of Spitz melanomas, indicating that histomorphology is an unreliable predictor of Spitz lineage.