4.4 Article

Histone 3.3 mutations in giant cell tumor and giant cell-rich sarcomas of bone

期刊

HUMAN PATHOLOGY
卷 68, 期 -, 页码 128-135

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.humpath.2017.08.033

关键词

Giant cell tumor of bone; Giant cell rich sarcomas; Malignant giant cell tumor; Histone 3.3 gene mutations; COLD-PCR

资金

  1. University of Florence (Florence, Italy)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mutually exclusive histone 3.3 gene mutations have been recognized in chondroblastoma and giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB), which may be useful for differential diagnostic purposes in morphologically ambiguous cases. Although more than 90% of GCTBs present histone 3.3 variants exclusively in the H3F3A gene, chondroblastoma is mutated mainly in H3F3B. In this study, we examined a series of giant cell rich primary bone tumors, aiming to evaluate the possible diagnostic role of histone 3.3 mutations in the differential diagnosis between GCTB and giant cell rich sarcomas. Sixteen cases of nonmetastatic GCTB, 9 GCTBs with lung metastases, and 35 giant cell rich sarcomas were selected from our institutional archives. Eight chondroblastomas were used as controls. Direct sequencing for the presence of H3F3A and H3F3B variants in coding region between codons 1 and 42, including the hotspot codons (28, 35, and 37), was performed on DNA extracted from formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue using conventional polymerase chain reaction and fast coamplification at lower denaturation temperature polymerase chain reaction. Overall, 24 GCTBs (96%) presented a mutation in the H3F3A gene (15 of 16 nonmetastatic and 9 of 9 metastatic). Five sarcomas harbored an H3F3A mutation (3 p.G35W, 1 p.G35L, and 1 p.G35E), and these were all secondary malignant GCTBs. In conclusion, we confirm that H3F3A mutational testing may be a useful adjunct to differentiate GCTB from giant cell rich sarcomas. Although the presence of H3F3A mutations does not exclude with certainty a diagnosis of sarcoma, the possibility of a malignant evolution of GCTB should also be considered. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据