Paratesticular liposarcoma: the clinicopathological features of nineteen cases.
10.3760/cma.j.cn112151-20210324-00229
- Author:
Shao Min YANG
1
;
Ruo Chen WU
2
;
Shuang Shuang QI
3
;
Jiang Feng YOU
1
Author Information
1. Department of Pathology, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Third Hospital, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing 100191, China.
2. Department of Pathology, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Shandong First Medical University, Tai'an 271000, China.
3. Department of Pathology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH:
Adult;
Genital Neoplasms, Male/surgery*;
Humans;
In Situ Hybridization, Fluorescence;
Liposarcoma/surgery*;
Male;
Proto-Oncogene Proteins c-mdm2/genetics*;
Soft Tissue Neoplasms
- From:
Chinese Journal of Pathology
2022;51(1):17-22
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective: To investigate the clinicopathological features and differential diagnoses of paratesticular liposarcoma. Methods: The cases were collected from 2012-2020, from the archives of the Department of Pathology, Peking University Third Hospital, with diagnosis confirmed by histology, immunostaining and FISH tests. Results: Totally 19 patients were enrolled (including 11 in-hospital patients and 8 consultant cases). The patients aged 37-84 years (mean 57 years). The preoperative clinical diagnoses were spermatic cord/inguinal masses (nine patients), scrotal masses (seven patients), and inguinal hernia (three patients). Six lesions recurred after local resection, including one case extending from pelvic liposarcoma. Histologically, there were 10 cases of well-differentiated liposarcoma (WDLPS) and nine cases of dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDLPS). WDLPSs mostly showed the combined features of lipoma-like, inflammatory and sclerosing subtypes (six patients); the other four WDLPSs had pure lipoma-like subtype features. DDLPSs were low-grade (three patients) or high-grade (six patients), with the morphology resembling myxofibrosarcoma, inflammatory myofibroblastoma, spindle cell sarcoma, pleomorphic undifferentiated sarcoma and pleomorphic liposarcoma. Intense inflammatory cells infiltration was commonly observed in five WDLPSs and two DDLPSs. Ossification was observed in three tumors. Immunohistochemically, the tumors were positive for MDM2 (8/10) and CDK4 (10/10), which were expressed in lipo-differentiating cells, spindle cells in WDLPS, and in dediffferentiated components. S-100 was only expressed by lipocytes (10/10). CD34 expression was positive and diffuse in the stromal cells of WDLPSs and focal or diffuse in dedifferentiated areas (10/10). FISH tests with an MDM2 gene probe were positive (12/12). Conclusions: Paratesticular liposarcoma may be overlooked by both clinicians and pathologists. WDLPS and DDLPS predominate, showing various histologic divergences. The presence of amplification of the 12q14-q15 region (containing the MDM2 and CDK4 genes) is helpful for making the correct diagnosis.
