Successful treatment of spindle cell hemangiomas in a patient with Maffucci syndrome and review of literatures

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramrada Lekwuttikarn ◽  
James Chang ◽  
Joyce M. C. Teng
2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vishal Gupta ◽  
Asit Ranjan Mridha ◽  
Binod K. Khaitan

2011 ◽  
Vol 43 (12) ◽  
pp. 1256-1261 ◽  
Author(s):  
Twinkal C Pansuriya ◽  
Ronald van Eijk ◽  
Pio d'Adamo ◽  
Maayke A J H van Ruler ◽  
Marieke L Kuijjer ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. mcs.a006127
Author(s):  
Natasha J. Brown ◽  
Zimeng Ye ◽  
Chloe Stutterd ◽  
Sureshni I. Jayasinghe ◽  
Amy Schneider ◽  
...  

Maffucci Syndrome is a rare, highly variable somatic mosaic condition and well-known cancer related gain-of-function variants in either the IDH1 or IDH2 genes have been found in the affected tissues of most reported patients. Features include benign enchondroma and spindle cell hemangioma, with a recognized increased risk of various malignancies. Fewer than 200 cases have been reported, therefore accurate estimates of malignancy risk are difficult to quantify and recommended surveillance guidelines are not available. The same gain-of-function IDH1 and IDH2 variants are also implicated in a variety of other benign and malignant tumors. An adult male presented with several soft palpable lesions on the right upper limb. Imaging and histopathology raised the possibility of Maffucci syndrome. DNA was extracted from peripheral blood lymphocytes and tissue surgically resected from a spindle-cell hemangioma. Sanger sequencing and Droplet-digital PCR analysis of the IDH1 gene was performed. We identified a somatic mosaic c.394C>T (p.R132C) variant in exon 5 of IDH1, in DNA derived from hemangioma tissue at ~ 17% mutant allele frequency. This variant was absent in DNA derived from blood. This variant has been identified in the affected tissue of most reported patients with Maffucci syndrome Although the patient has a potentially targetable variant, and there is a recognized risk of malignant transformation in this condition, a decision was made not to intervene with an IDH1 inhibitor. The reasons and prospects for therapy in this condition are discussed.


2013 ◽  
Vol 40 (7) ◽  
pp. 661-666 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu Cai ◽  
Rong Wang ◽  
Xin-Ming Chen ◽  
Yi-Fang Zhao ◽  
Zhi-Jun Sun ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 48-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takahiro Tsuji ◽  
Young Hak Kim ◽  
Hiroaki Ozasa ◽  
Yuichi Sakamori ◽  
Hiroki Nagai ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Giovanni Deb ◽  
Alessandro Jenkner ◽  
Luigi De Sio ◽  
Renata Boldrini ◽  
Cesare Bosman ◽  
...  

2000 ◽  
Vol 142 (6) ◽  
pp. 1238-1239 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Setoyama ◽  
H. Shimada ◽  
N. Miyazono ◽  
Y. Baba ◽  
T. Kanzaki

Author(s):  
Irving Dardick

With the extensive industrial use of asbestos in this century and the long latent period (20-50 years) between exposure and tumor presentation, the incidence of malignant mesothelioma is now increasing. Thus, surgical pathologists are more frequently faced with the dilemma of differentiating mesothelioma from metastatic adenocarcinoma and spindle-cell sarcoma involving serosal surfaces. Electron microscopy is amodality useful in clarifying this problem.In utilizing ultrastructural features in the diagnosis of mesothelioma, it is essential to appreciate that the classification of this tumor reflects a variety of morphologic forms of differing biologic behavior (Table 1). Furthermore, with the variable histology and degree of differentiation in mesotheliomas it might be expected that the ultrastructure of such tumors also reflects a range of cytological features. Such is the case.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document