pleomorphic dermal sarcoma
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

53
(FIVE YEARS 30)

H-INDEX

6
(FIVE YEARS 2)

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (8) ◽  
pp. e244730
Author(s):  
Gowtham Kampalli ◽  
Satyaswarup Tripathy ◽  
Suraj Nair ◽  
Ramesh Kumar Sharma

Atypical fibroxanthoma (AFX) is a rare cutaneous ulcerative lesion with a good prognosis. Diagnosis is difficult and is usually made by exclusion from pleomorphic dermal sarcoma and squamous cell carcinoma. Definitive treatment varies from Mohs micrographic surgery to wide local excision. We present a case of 76-year-old woman with AFX over the dorsum of her left hand. The tumour was excised and the resulting defect was reconstructed with a local second dorsal metacarpal artery perforator flap.


Genes ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (7) ◽  
pp. 974
Author(s):  
Melike Ak ◽  
Abdullah Kahraman ◽  
Fabian M. Arnold ◽  
Patrick Turko ◽  
Mitchell P. Levesque ◽  
...  

Atypical fibroxanthoma (AFX) and pleomorphic dermal sarcoma (PDS) are rare tumors developing in chronically sun-exposed skin. Clinicopathological features are similar, but they differ in prognosis, while PDS has a more aggressive course with a higher risk for local recurrence and metastases. In current clinical practice, they are diagnosed by exclusion using immunohistochemistry. Thus, stringent diagnostic criteria and correct differentiation are critical in management and treatment for optimal outcomes. This retrospective single-center study collected clinicopathological data and tumor samples of 10 AFX and 18 PDS. Extracted genomic DNA from tumor specimens was analyzed by a next-generation sequencing (NGS) platform (FoundationOne-CDx™). Among 65 identified mutations, TP53 inactivating mutations were observed in all tumor specimens. In both AFX and PDS, the known pathogenic gene alterations in CDKN2A, TERT promoter, and NOTCH1 were frequently present, along with high mutational burden and stable Micro-Satellite Instability status. The mutational profiles differed only in ASXL1, which was only present in AFX. Further differences were identified in likely pathogenic and unknown gene alterations. Similarities in their genomic signatures could help to distinguish them from other malignancies, but they are not distinguishable between each other using the FoundationOne-CDx™ NGS panel. Therefore, histological criteria to determine diagnosis remain valid. For further insight, performing deep tumor profiling may be necessary.


Author(s):  
Cristina López‐Llunell ◽  
Mireia Yébenes ◽  
Patricia Garbayo‐Salmons ◽  
Lorena Leal ◽  
Alfonso Mogedas‐Vergara

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 100046
Author(s):  
Robert L Devine ◽  
Alice Cameron ◽  
Adam M Holden ◽  
Ahmed Basiouni ◽  
Serryth D Colbert

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document