Inga-Marie Schaefer and Jason L. Hornick, Brigham and Women's Hospital-Harvard Medical School; and Gregory M. Cote, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center-Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
J Clin Oncol. 2018 Jan 10;36(2):101-110. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.74.9374. Epub 2017 Dec 8.
Sarcomas include diverse mesenchymal neoplasms with widely varied prognosis, clinical behavior, and treatment. Owing to their rarity and histologic overlap, accurate diagnosis of sarcomas can be challenging. Our approach has evolved dramatically in the past few decades, where novel insights into the molecular pathogenetic basis for sarcomas has dramatically (re)shaped contemporary diagnosis, building on a largely morphology- and clinical presentation-based strategy. Examples include the introduction of novel immunohistochemical markers that serve as surrogates for molecular genetic alterations and identification of characteristic molecular alterations. Accordingly, cytogenetic and molecular genetic analyses, such as conventional karyotyping, fluorescence in situ hybridization, reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction, and targeted sequencing, have increasingly been incorporated into the routine diagnostic work-up of these neoplasms. For those sarcomas with complex cytogenetic changes that lack specific alterations, additional testing is often directed toward identifying lines of differentiation and excluding pathognomonic (cyto-)genetic alterations. Although some gene rearrangements are diagnostic of particular sarcoma types, certain fusion partners, most notably EWSR1, are not tumor specific (and may, in fact, also be found in benign tumors). Correlation with clinical, radiologic, morphologic, and immunohistochemical findings is particularly important in tumors with such rearrangements to establish the correct diagnosis, acknowledging the inherent limitations of diagnostic tests. The recognition of sarcomas occurring in cancer predisposition syndromes is critical, with implications not only for the index patient but also potentially for family members, including the need for genetic counseling and sometimes particular types of surveillance. Together, contemporary sarcoma evaluation involves combining the initial morphologic evaluation with diagnostically relevant cytogenetic, molecular, and immunohistochemical testing methods.
肉瘤包括具有广泛不同预后、临床行为和治疗方法的多种间叶性肿瘤。由于其罕见性和组织学重叠,肉瘤的准确诊断具有挑战性。在过去的几十年中,我们的方法发生了巨大的变化,对肉瘤分子发病机制的新认识极大地(重新)塑造了当代诊断,在此基础上建立了基于形态学和临床表现的策略。例如,引入了新的免疫组织化学标志物,这些标志物可作为分子遗传改变的替代物,并确定了特征性分子改变。因此,细胞遗传学和分子遗传学分析,如常规核型分析、荧光原位杂交、逆转录聚合酶链反应和靶向测序,已越来越多地纳入这些肿瘤的常规诊断工作中。对于那些具有复杂细胞遗传学改变但缺乏特定改变的肉瘤,通常会进行额外的测试,以确定分化谱系并排除特征性(细胞)遗传学改变。尽管一些基因重排是特定肉瘤类型的诊断标志,但某些融合伙伴,尤其是 EWSR1,并非肿瘤特异性(实际上,也可能在良性肿瘤中发现)。与临床、放射学、形态学和免疫组织化学发现的相关性在具有这些重排的肿瘤中尤为重要,以建立正确的诊断,同时承认诊断测试的固有局限性。识别发生在癌症易感性综合征中的肉瘤至关重要,这不仅对索引患者而且对家庭成员都有影响,包括遗传咨询的需要,有时还需要特定类型的监测。总之,当代肉瘤评估涉及将初始形态学评估与具有诊断意义的细胞遗传学、分子和免疫组织化学检测方法相结合。