Search

Background. Spindle cell/sclerosing rhabdomyosarcoma is a rare neoplasm and has an aggressive clinical course. Because of its rarity, we performed a multi-institutional collaboration to comprehend the overarching clinical, histopathological, and immunohistochemical characteristics of a cohort of spindle cell/sclerosing rhabdomyosarcoma. Materials and Methods. Forty-five patients with spindle cell/sclerosing rhabdomyosarcoma were identified. Demographics, clinical, histopathological, and immunohistochemistry data were reviewed and recorded. Results. The patients' age ranged from 1 to 85 years with a male to female ratio of 1.2:1. There were 15 children/adolescents and 30 adults. Eighteen (40%) tumors were located in the head and neck region. Twenty-four (53%) tumors displayed a bimorphic cellular arrangement with hypercellular areas having short, long, and sweeping fascicular and herringbone pattern, and hypocellular areas with stromal sclerosis and associated hyalinized and/or chondromyxoid matrix. Histomorphological differentials considered were leiomyosarcoma, malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor, fibrosarcoma, nodular fasciitis, liposarcoma, synovial sarcoma, sarcomatoid carcinoma, solitary fibrous tumor, dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans, and schwannoma. Six tumors exhibited marked stromal sclerosis. The myogenic nature was confirmed by immunohistochemistry. Positivity for at least one skeletal muscle-associated marker (MyoD1 and/or myogenin) was observed. Conclusion . Spindle cell/sclerosing rhabdomyosarcoma diagnosis can be challenging as a number of malignant spindle cell neoplasm mimic this entity. Thus a correct diagnosis requires immunohistochemical work up with a broad panel of antibodies. In view of rarity of this neoplasm, further studies on a large cohort of patients with clinical follow-up data are needed for a better understanding of this tumor., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background. Neuroendocrine differentiation in the prostate gland ranges from clinically insignificant neuroendocrine differentiation detected with markers in an otherwise conventional prostatic adenocarcinoma to a lethal high-grade small/large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma. The concept of neuroendocrine differentiation in prostatic adenocarcinoma has gained considerable importance due to its prognostic and therapeutic ramifications and pathologists play a pivotal role in its recognition. However, its awareness, reporting, and resource utilization practice patterns among pathologists are largely unknown. Methods. Representative examples of different spectrums of neuroendocrine differentiation along with a detailed questionnaire were shared among 39 urologic pathologists using the survey monkey software. Participants were specifically questioned about the use and awareness of the 2016 WHO classification of neuroendocrine tumors of the prostate, understanding of the clinical significance of each entity, and use of different immunohistochemical (IHC) markers. De-identified respondent data were analyzed. Results. A vast majority (90%) of the participants utilize IHC markers to confirm the diagnosis of small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma. A majority (87%) of the respondents were in agreement regarding the utilization of type of IHC markers for small cell neuroendocrine carcinoma for which 85% of the pathologists agreed that determination of the site of origin of a high-grade neuroendocrine carcinoma is not critical, as these are treated similarly. In the setting of mixed carcinomas, 62% of respondents indicated that they provide quantification and grading of the acinar component. There were varied responses regarding the prognostic implication of focal neuroendocrine cells in an otherwise conventional acinar adenocarcinoma and for Paneth cell-like differentiation. The classification of large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma was highly varied, with only 38% agreement in the illustrated case. Finally, despite the recommendation not to perform neuroendocrine markers in the absence of morphologic evidence of neuroendocrine differentiation, 62% would routinely utilize IHC in the work-up of a Gleason score 5 + 5 = 10 acinar adenocarcinoma and its differentiation from high-grade neuroendocrine carcinoma. Conclusion. There is a disparity in the practice utilization patterns among the urologic pathologists with regard to diagnosing high-grade neuroendocrine carcinoma and in understanding the clinical significance of focal neuroendocrine cells in an otherwise conventional acinar adenocarcinoma and Paneth cell-like neuroendocrine differentiation. There seems to have a trend towards overutilization of IHC to determine neuroendocrine differentiation in the absence of neuroendocrine features on morphology. The survey results suggest a need for further refinement and development of standardized guidelines for the classification and reporting of neuroendocrine differentiation in the prostate gland.

Meningeal Rosai-Dorfman disease, a type of sporadic Rosai-Dorfman disease, is a rare occurrence. A few cases are reported in the English literature with an adequate immunohistochemical workup. This entity clinically and radiologically mimics either a meningeal or a parenchymal neoplasm with meningeal extension, warranting a thorough histopathologic evaluation. A broad histologic differential necessitates a detailed immunohistochemical characterization to render a correct diagnosis that has significant therapeutic and prognostic implications. Herein, we report a case of isolated meningeal Rosai-Dorfman disease in a 50-years-old human immunodeficiency virus-positive male patient with an emphasis on the histopathology, immunoprofile, and differential diagnoses.