Cauda equina neuroendocrine tumors show biological features distinct from other paragangliomas and visceral neuroendocrine tumors.
Cauda equina
Immunohistochemistry
Neuroendocrine tumors
Paragangliomas
Sox2
Journal
Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology
ISSN: 1432-2307
Titre abrégé: Virchows Arch
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9423843
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2023
Feb 2023
Historique:
received:
28
05
2022
accepted:
23
10
2022
revised:
26
08
2022
pubmed:
9
11
2022
medline:
18
2
2023
entrez:
8
11
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Cauda equina neuroendocrine tumors (CENETs) are neoplasms of uncertain histogenesis with overlapping features between those of paragangliomas (PGs) and visceral neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). We have explored their biological relationship to both subsets of neuroendocrine neoplasms. The clinical and radiological features of a cohort of 23 CENETs were analyzed. A total of 21 cases were included in tissue microarrays, along with a control group of 38 PGs and 83 NETs. An extensive panel of antibodies was used to assess epithelial phenotype (cytokeratins, E-cadherin, EpCAM, Claudin-4, EMA, CD138), neuronal and neuroendocrine features (synaptophysin, chromogranin A, INSM1, neurofilaments, NeuN, internexin-α, calretinin), chromaffin differentiation (GATA3, Phox2b, tyrosine hydroxylase), and possible histogenesis (Sox2, T-brachyury, Oct3/4, Sox10). The cohort included 5 women (22%) and 18 men (78%). The average age at the time of surgery was 48.3 years (range from 21 to 80 years). The average diameter of the tumors was 39.27 mm, and invasion of surrounding structures was observed in 6/21 (29%) tumors. Follow-up was available in 16 patients (median 46.5 months). One tumor recurred after 19 months. No metastatic behavior and no endocrine activity were observed. Compared to control groups, CENETs lacked expression of epithelial adhesion molecules (EpCAM, CD138, E-cadherin, Claudin-4), and at the same time, they lacked features of chromaffin differentiation (GATA3, Phox2b, tyrosine hydroxylase). We observed no loss of SDHB. Cytokeratin expression was present in all CENETs. All the CENETs showed variable cytoplasmic expression of T-brachyury and limited nuclear expression of Sox2. These findings support the unique nature of the neoplasm with respect to NETs and PGs.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36348031
doi: 10.1007/s00428-022-03441-1
pii: 10.1007/s00428-022-03441-1
doi:
Substances chimiques
Epithelial Cell Adhesion Molecule
0
Claudin-4
0
Tyrosine 3-Monooxygenase
EC 1.14.16.2
Transcription Factors
0
INSM1 protein, human
147955-03-1
Repressor Proteins
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
325-338Subventions
Organisme : Ministerstvo Zdravotnictví Ceské Republiky
ID : NV19-01-00435
Organisme : BBMRI-CZ
ID : LM2018125
Organisme : Univerzita Karlova v Praze
ID : Cooperatio Program, research area DIAG
Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Moran CA, Rush W, Mena H (1997) Primary spinal paragangliomas: a clinicopathological and immunohistochemical study of 30 cases. Histopathology 31:167–173. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2559.1997.2300841.x
doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2559.1997.2300841.x
pubmed: 9279569
Ramani B, Gupta R, Wu J, Barreto J, Bollen AW, Tihan T, Mummaneni PV, Ames C, Clark A, Oberheim Bush NA, Butowski N, Phillips D, King BE, Bator SM, Treynor EC, Zherebitskiy V, Quinn PS, Walker JB, Pekmezci M et al (2020) The immunohistochemical, DNA methylation, and chromosomal copy number profile of cauda equina paraganglioma is distinct from extra-spinal paraganglioma. Acta Neuropathol 140:907–917. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-020-02221-y
doi: 10.1007/s00401-020-02221-y
pubmed: 32892244
pmcid: 7682537
Schweizer L, Thierfelder F, Thomas C, Soschinski P, Suwala A, Stichel D, Wefers AK, Wessels L, Misch M, Kim HY, Jodicke R, Teichmann D, Kaul D, Kahn J, Bockmayr M, Hasselblatt M, Younsi A, Unterberg A, Knie B et al (2020) Molecular characterization of CNS paragangliomas identifies cauda equina paragangliomas as a distinct tumor entity. Acta Neuropathol 140:893–906. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-020-02218-7
doi: 10.1007/s00401-020-02218-7
pubmed: 32926213
pmcid: 7666289
Miliaras GC, Kyritsis AP, Polyzoidis KS (2003) Cauda equina paraganglioma: a review. J Neuro-Oncol 65:177–190. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:neon.0000003753.27452.20
doi: 10.1023/b:neon.0000003753.27452.20
Fishbein L, Leshchiner I, Walter V, Danilova L, Robertson AG, Johnson AR, Lichtenberg TM, Murray BA, Ghayee HK, Else T, Ling S, Jefferys SR, de Cubas AA, Wenz B, Korpershoek E, Amelio AL, Makowski L, Rathmell WK, Gimenez-Roqueplo AP, Giordano TJ, Asa SL, Tischler AS, Cancer Genome Atlas Research N, Pacak K, Nathanson KL, Wilkerson MD (2017) Comprehensive molecular characterization of pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma. Cancer Cell 31:181-193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccell.2017.01.001
Mamilla D, Manukyan I, Fetsch PA, Pacak K, Miettinen M (2020) Immunohistochemical distinction of paragangliomas from epithelial neuroendocrine tumors-gangliocytic duodenal and cauda equina paragangliomas align with epithelial neuroendocrine tumors. Hum Pathol 103:72–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2020.07.010
doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2020.07.010
pubmed: 32668278
pmcid: 7530041
Kimura N, Shiga K, Kaneko K, Sugisawa C, Katabami T, Naruse M (2020) The diagnostic dilemma of GATA3 immunohistochemistry in pheochromocytoma and paraganglioma. Endocr Pathol 31:95–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12022-020-09618-1
doi: 10.1007/s12022-020-09618-1
pubmed: 32303954
Miettinen M, McCue PA, Sarlomo-Rikala M, Rys J, Czapiewski P, Wazny K, Langfort R, Waloszczyk P, Biernat W, Lasota J, Wang Z (2014) GATA3: a multispecific but potentially useful marker in surgical pathology: a systematic analysis of 2500 epithelial and nonepithelial tumors. Am J Surg Pathol 38:13–22. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0b013e3182a0218f
doi: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e3182a0218f
pubmed: 24145643
pmcid: 3991431
Mete O, Asa SL, Gill AJ, Kimura N, de Krijger RR, Tischler A (2022) Overview of the 2022 WHO Classification of Paragangliomas and Pheochromocytomas. Endocr Pathol 33:90–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12022-022-09704-6
doi: 10.1007/s12022-022-09704-6
pubmed: 35285002
Furlan A, Dyachuk V, Kastriti ME, Calvo-Enrique L, Abdo H, Hadjab S, Chontorotzea T, Akkuratova N, Usoskin D, Kamenev D, Petersen J, Sunadome K, Memic F, Marklund U, Fried K, Topilko P, Lallemend F, Kharchenko PV, Ernfors P, Adameyko I (2017) Multipotent peripheral glial cells generate neuroendocrine cells of the adrenal medulla. Science:357. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aal3753
Simoes-Costa M, Bronner ME (2015) Establishing neural crest identity: a gene regulatory recipe. Development 142:242–257. https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.105445
doi: 10.1242/dev.105445
pubmed: 25564621
pmcid: 4302844
Kloppel G (2017) Neuroendocrine neoplasms: dichotomy, origin and classifications. Visc Med 33:324–330. https://doi.org/10.1159/000481390
doi: 10.1159/000481390
pubmed: 29177160
pmcid: 5697503
Wildner H, Gierl MS, Strehle M, Pla P, Birchmeier C (2008) Insm1 (IA-1) is a crucial component of the transcriptional network that controls differentiation of the sympatho-adrenal lineage. Development 135:473–481. https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.011783
doi: 10.1242/dev.011783
pubmed: 18094025
Gehart H, van Es JH, Hamer K, Beumer J, Kretzschmar K, Dekkers JF, Rios A, Clevers H (2019) Identification of enteroendocrine regulators by real-time single-cell differentiation mapping cell 176:1158-1173 e1116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2018.12.029
Alexander RE, Cheng L, Grignon DJ, Idrees MT (2014) Cytoplasmic OCT4 staining is a sensitive marker of neuroendocrine differentiation. Hum Pathol 45:27–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2013.08.006
doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2013.08.006
pubmed: 24182453
Zhang PJ, Genega EM, Tomaszewski JE, Pasha TL, LiVolsi VA (2003) The role of calretinin, inhibin, melan-A, BCL-2, and C-kit in differentiating adrenal cortical and medullary tumors: an immunohistochemical study Mod Pathol 16:591-597. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.MP.0000073134.60541.E8
Yang J, Antin P, Berx G, Blanpain C, Brabletz T, Bronner M, Campbell K, Cano A, Casanova J, Christofori G, Dedhar S, Derynck R, Ford HL, Fuxe J, Garcia de Herreros A, Goodall GJ, Hadjantonakis AK, Huang RYJ, Kalcheim C, Kalluri R, Kang Y, Khew-Goodall Y, Levine H, Liu J, Longmore GD, Mani SA, Massague J, Mayor R, McClay D, Mostov KE, Newgreen DF, Nieto MA, Puisieux A, Runyan R, Savagner P, Stanger B, Stemmler MP, Takahashi Y, Takeichi M, Theveneau E, Thiery JP, Thompson EW, Weinberg RA, Williams ED, Xing J, Zhou BP, Sheng G, Association EMTI (2020) Guidelines and definitions for research on epithelial-mesenchymal transition Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 21:341-8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41580-020-0237-9
Asa SL, Mete O (2020) Cytokeratin profiles in pituitary neuroendocrine tumors hum pathol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2020.10.004
Chetty R, Asa SL (2004) Pancreatic endocrine tumour with cytoplasmic keratin whorls. Is the term “rhabdoid” appropriate? J Clin Pathol 57:1106–1110. https://doi.org/10.1136/jcp.2004.018309
doi: 10.1136/jcp.2004.018309
pubmed: 15452172
pmcid: 1770450
Miyazaki T, Aishima S, Fujino M, Ozono K, Kubo Y, Ushijima Y, Osoegawa T, Ihara E, Tetsuhide I, Ohtsuka T, Nakamura M, Oda Y (2018) Neuroendocrine tumor of the pancreas with rhabdoid feature. Virchows Arch 473:247–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-018-2398-x
doi: 10.1007/s00428-018-2398-x
pubmed: 29938394
pmcid: 6096768
Bardag-Gorce F, Riley N, Nguyen V, Montgomery RO, French BA, Li J, van Leeuwen FW, Lungo W, McPhaul LW, French SW (2003) The mechanism of cytokeratin aggresome formation: the role of mutant ubiquitin (UBB+1). Exp Mol Pathol 74:160–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0014-4800(02)00024-2
doi: 10.1016/s0014-4800(02)00024-2
pubmed: 12710947
Gammill LS, Bronner-Fraser M (2002) Genomic analysis of neural crest induction Development 129:5731-5741. https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.00175
Lignell A, Kerosuo L, Streichan SJ, Cai L, Bronner ME (2017) Identification of a neural crest stem cell niche by Spatial Genomic Analysis. Nat Commun 8:1830. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-01561-w
doi: 10.1038/s41467-017-01561-w
pubmed: 29184067
pmcid: 5705662
Gown AM, Boyd HC, Chang Y, Ferguson M, Reichler B, Tippens D (1988) Smooth muscle cells can express cytokeratins of “simple” epithelium. Immunocytochemical and biochemical studies in vitro and in vivo. Am J Pathol 132:223–232
pubmed: 2456700
pmcid: 1880728
Iwatsuki H, Suda M (2010) Transient expression of keratin during neuronal development in the adult rabbit spinal ganglion. Anat Sci Int 85:46–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12565-009-0054-x
doi: 10.1007/s12565-009-0054-x
pubmed: 19629632
Tseng IC, Yeh MM, Yang CY, Jeng YM (2015) NKX6-1 Is a novel immunohistochemical marker for pancreatic and duodenal neuroendocrine tumors Am J Surg Pathol 39:850-857. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0000000000000435
An Z, Liu P, Zheng J, Si C, Li T, Chen Y, Ma T, Zhang MQ, Zhou Q, Ding S (2019) Sox2 and Klf4 as the functional core in pluripotency induction without exogenous. Cell Rep 29:1986–2000 e1988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2019.10.026
doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2019.10.026
pubmed: 31722212
Kimura N, Shiga K, Kaneko KI, Oki Y, Sugisawa C, Saito J, Tawara S, Akahori H, Sogabe S, Yamashita T, Takekoshi K, Naruse M, Katabami T (2021) Immunohistochemical expression of choline acetyltransferase and catecholamine-synthesizing enzymes in head-and-neck and thoracoabdominal paragangliomas and pheochromocytomas. Endocr Pathol 32:442–451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12022-021-09694-x
doi: 10.1007/s12022-021-09694-x
pubmed: 34743284
Lee JP, Hung YP, O'Dorisio TM, Howe JR, Hornick JL, Bellizzi AM (2017) Examination of PHOX2B in adult neuroendocrine neoplasms reveals relatively frequent expression in phaeochromocytomas and paragangliomas Histopathology 71:503-510. https://doi.org/10.1111/his.13243
Barresi V, Ieni A, Branca G, Tuccari G (2014) Brachyury: a diagnostic marker for the differential diagnosis of chordoma and hemangioblastoma versus neoplastic histological mimickers. Dis Markers 2014:514753. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/514753
doi: 10.1155/2014/514753
pubmed: 24591762
pmcid: 3925620
Chen M, Wu Y, Zhang H, Li S, Zhou J, Shen J (2020) The roles of embryonic transcription factor BRACHYURY in tumorigenesis and progression Front. Oncol 10:961. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.00961
doi: 10.3389/fonc.2020.00961
Lee KH, Kim EY, Yun JS, Park YL, Do SI, Chae SW, Park CH (2018) Prognostic significance of expression of epithelial-mesenchymal transition driver brachyury in breast cancer and its association with subtype and characteristics. Oncol Lett 15:1037–1045. https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2017.7402
doi: 10.3892/ol.2017.7402
pubmed: 29399164
Pinto F, Pertega-Gomes N, Pereira MS, Vizcaino JR, Monteiro P, Henrique RM, Baltazar F, Andrade RP, Reis RM (2014) T-box transcription factor brachyury is associated with prostate cancer progression and aggressiveness. Clin Cancer Res 20:4949–4961. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-0421
doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-0421
pubmed: 25009296
Bockmayr M, Korner M, Schweizer L, Schuller U (2021) Cauda equina paragangliomas express HOXB13. Neuropathol Appl Neurobiol 47:889–890. https://doi.org/10.1111/nan.12713
doi: 10.1111/nan.12713
pubmed: 33768604
Zeltser L, Desplan C, Heintz N (1996) Hoxb-13: a new Hox gene in a distant region of the HOXB cluster maintains colinearity. Development 122:2475–2484. https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.122.8.2475
doi: 10.1242/dev.122.8.2475
pubmed: 8756292
Rocha M, Beiriger A, Kushkowski EE, Miyashita T, Singh N, Venkataraman V, Prince VE (2020) From head to tail: regionalization of the neural crest. Development:147. https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.193888
Gouti M, Delile J, Stamataki D, Wymeersch FJ, Huang Y, Kleinjung J, Wilson V, Briscoe J (2017) A gene regulatory network balances neural and mesoderm specification during vertebrate trunk development Dev Cell 41:243-261 e247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2017.04.002
Koch F, Scholze M, Wittler L, Schifferl D, Sudheer S, Grote P, Timmermann B, Macura K, Herrmann BG (2017) Antagonistic activities of Sox2 and brachyury control the fate choice of neuro-mesodermal progenitors Dev. Cell 42:514–526 e517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2017.07.021
doi: 10.1016/j.devcel.2017.07.021