Premium
Low‐grade fibrosarcoma—report on 39 not otherwise specified cases and comparison with defined low‐grade fibrosarcoma types
Author(s) -
Hansen T,
Katenkamp K,
Brodhun M,
Katenkamp D
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
histopathology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.626
H-Index - 124
eISSN - 1365-2559
pISSN - 0309-0167
DOI - 10.1111/j.1365-2559.2006.02480.x
Subject(s) - fibrosarcoma , sarcoma , pathology , soft tissue , trunk , medicine , soft tissue sarcoma , biology , ecology
Aims: Low‐grade fibrosarcomas are tumours that mainly affect the extremities and trunk of adults of either sex. Among these, low‐grade fibromyxoid sarcoma (FMS), hyalinizing spindle cell tumour with giant collagen rosettes (HST) and sclerosing epithelioid fibrosarcoma (SEF) are well‐established entities. In this study, our aim was to describe a group of low‐grade fibrosarcomatous tumours, which could not be encompassed by these entities. These low‐grade fibrosarcomas, not otherwise specified (FNOS) were provisionally designated as ‘fibrosarcoma, low‐grade fibroblastic type’. Methods and results: In the soft tissue tumour registry we found 39 FNOS (46%), 31 FMS (36%), 11 SEF (13%) and four HST (5%). FNOS occurred in older patients than FMS (mean age 56.3 years versus 33.7 years). They mainly showed fibrous features, but myxoid areas could also be seen. While cells tended to be loosely arranged in the myxoid areas, densely packed sheets with a storiform pattern, fascicular arrangements or regions without a defined growth pattern were observed in the fibrous areas. However, neither whirling nor swirling patterns were found. Arcade‐like vessels were not visible; pseudolipoblasts did not occur. FNOS exhibited increased atypia and mitotic count compared with the other sarcomas studied [FNOS, mean value 4.6 mitoses/10 high‐power field (HPF); FMS, 0.7/10 HPF). Follow‐up data were available in 21 FNOS patients. In seven cases (33.3%), local recurrences were reported. Three patients (14.3%) developed metastases and all of them died of tumour. Conclusions: The term ‘fibrosarcoma, low‐grade fibroblastic type’ should be used as a diagnosis of exclusion. Further studies should elucidate whether it represents a distinct fibrosarcoma type.