| Literature DB >> 22182738 |
Zhuo Zuo1, Yuan Tang, Cheng-Feng Bi, Wen-Yan Zhang, Sha Zhao, Xiao-Qing Wang, Qun-Pei Yang, Li-Qun Zou, Wei-Ping Liu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Extraosseous plasmacytoma, so called extramedullary plasmacytoma (EMP) is relatively rare in China. The aim was investigate the clinicopathologic features of EMP and the role of Immunophenotype and genotype detection in diagnosis of EMP.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2011 PMID: 22182738 PMCID: PMC3278682 DOI: 10.1186/1746-1596-6-123
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diagn Pathol ISSN: 1746-1596 Impact factor: 2.644
Clinical features (n = 32)
| Contents | Patients | |
|---|---|---|
| No./Total number | Percentage | |
| Male | 22 | 62.5 |
| Female | 10 | 37.5 |
| Range | 30~85 | |
| Mean | 53.4 | |
| Median | 60 | |
| Upper areodigestive tract | 21 | 65.6 |
| Tonsil | 2 | 6.3 |
| skin | 6 | 18.8 |
| Gingiva | 1 | 3.1 |
| Lung | 1 | 3.1 |
| Testis | 1 | 3.1 |
| Normal marrow aspirate | 32 | 100 |
| Normal results on skeletal survey | 32 | 100 |
| low serum level of M-components | 2/21 | 9.5 |
| low urinary level of M-components | 0/8 | 0 |
| Dead | 10/15 | 67 (6.6 m) |
| Alive with disease | 3/15 | 20 (11.3 m) |
| Alive with recurrence | 2/15 | 13 (24 m) |
Clinicopathologic features and follow-up data
| Age | Sex | Sites | Size | Grading* | therapy | Follow-up | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 61 | M | NC | 1 × 1 × 1 | II | S | Lost | ||
| 63 | M | NC and PNS | 8 × 5 × 1 | II | S | Lost | ||
| 32 | M | NC and PNS | 2 × 2 × 2 | II | S | Lost | ||
| 60 | F | Lung | 4.3 × 3.5 × 1.5 | I | S | Lost | ||
| 47 | M | NC | 0.5 × 0.5 × 0.5 | I | S | ANED | 123 | |
| 53 | M | NC | 1 × 1 × 1 | I | S | Lost | ||
| 55 | F | NC and PNS | 5 × 3 ×1.5 | I | S+RT+C | AWD | 110 | |
| 62 | F | Chest wall | 11 × 1 0 | I | S | Lost | ||
| 63 | M | Tonsil | 3.5 × 3 × 2 | I | S | AWD | 97 | |
| 54 | M | NP | 2 × 2 × 1 | I | S | Lost | ||
| 46 | M | Occiput | 8 × 6 × 3 | I | S | Lost | ||
| 49 | F | NC | 1.5 × 1 ×0.2 | II | S | Lost | ||
| 48 | M | NC | 1.5 × 1 ×0.6 | III | S | Died | ? | |
| 58 | M | NC and PNS | 6 × 4 × 1 | III | S | ANED | 81 | |
| 32 | M | PNS | 4.5 × 4 × 1.5 | II | S | AWD | 92 | |
| 47 | M | trunk (back) | 20 × 1 5 × 1 0 | I | S | AWD | 75 | |
| 34 | M | NC and PNS | 3 × 3 ×1 | I | S | Lost | ||
| 50 | F | NC | 1 × 1 ×1 | III | S | Lost | ||
| 66 | F | NP | 0.5 × 0.5 × 0.5 | I | S+RT | ANED | 65 | |
| 77 | M | Cervical | 2 × 1.5 × 0.8 | I | S | Lost | ||
| 35 | M | NC and PNS | 6 × 5 × 3 | II | S | Lost | ||
| 47 | M | NC and PNS | 3 × 3 × 2 | II | S | DOD | 17 | |
| 55 | M | PNS | 2 × 1.6 × 0.6 | I | S | Died | ? | |
| 63 | M | PNS | 3 × 1.6 × 0.8 | I | S | DOD | 51 | |
| 67 | F | gum | 1.5 × 1.2 × 1 | II | S | Lost | ||
| 65 | M | cervicum | 1 × 1 ×0.7 | I | S | Lost | ||
| 85 | F | forehead | 2 × 1.4 × 1 | I | S | DOD | 11 | |
| 56 | M | PNS | 6 × 5 × 1 | III | S | DOD | 228 | |
| 30 | M | testis | 3.5 × 3 × 2 | II | S | Lost | ||
| 56 | M | NC | 1 × 1 × 0.3 | I | S | ANED | 17 | |
| 35 | F | tonsil | 1 × 1 × 1 | I | S | AWD | 6 | |
| 59 | F | PNS | 5 × 4 × 3 | II | S+RT | Lost | ||
M = male; F = female;
*Grading, according to Bartl et al. RT = Radiotherapy;
AWD = alive with disease; DOD = died of disease;
ANED = alive with no evidence of disease; NC = nasal cavity;
S = surgery; NP = nasopharynx;
C = chemotherapy; PNS = paranasal sinus.
R = relapse
Figure 1A mass of EMP in oral cavity (case 31).
Morphologic features (n = 32)
| Morphology | Number | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Tumor cell differentiation | ||
| Well (Grade I) | 18 | 56.3 |
| Moderate (Grade II) | 10 | 31.3 |
| Poor (Grade III) | 4 | 12.4 |
| 10 | 31.3 | |
| 4 | 12.5 | |
| 11 | 34.4 | |
| 6 | 18.8 | |
| 12 | 37.5 | |
| 3 | 9.4 |
Figure 2Histopathologic features of EMP. A. H&E stained section showed tumor cells of Grade I (case 27). B. Tumor cells of Grade II (case 22). C. Tumor cells of Grade III (case 28). D. Tumor cells infiltrated in subdermis (case 1).
Figure 3Histopathologic features of EMP. A. Dutcher's body (case 1). B. tumor giant cells (case 24). C. Amyloid deposition stained by congo red (case 9). D. Amyloid deposition stained by congo red showed a characteristic "apple-green" birefringence under polarized light (case 9).
Immunophenotype (n = 32)
| Antibody | Clonality | +/Total number | Percentage |
|---|---|---|---|
| PD7/26 | 11/32 | 34.4 | |
| L26 | 1/32 | 3.1 | |
| LE-CD19 | 1/32 | 3.1 | |
| JCB117 | 15/32 | 46.9 | |
| MI15 | 32/32 | 100 | |
| AT1 | 29/32 | 90.6 | |
| vs38c | 23/24 | 95.8 | |
| 123C3 | 6/32 | 18.8 | |
| - | 9/32 | 28.1 | |
| E29 | 10/32 | 31.3 | |
| 137B4 | 14/32 | 43.8 | |
| VEF-327v3 | 3/26 | 11.5 | |
| 2F10 | 18/32 | 56.3 | |
| 124 | 31/32 | 96.9 | |
| SP4 | 6/32 | 18.8 | |
| - | 11/32 | 34.4 | |
| - | 17/32 | 53.1 |
* Polyclonal antibody
Figure 4Immunophenotype of EMP, Grade I (case 16). A. CD138. B. CD38. C. CD56. D. CD27. E. CD44v6. F. Ki67. G&H. Tumor cells showed the restricted lamppa chain expression.
Figure 5Immunophenotype of EMP, Grade III. A. CD138 (case 14). B. CD38 (case 18). C. CD56 (case 13). D. CD27 (case 28). E. CD44v6 (case 14). F. Ki67 (case 13). G&H. Tumor cells showed the restricted kappa chain expression (case 13).
The major phenotypic differences of EMP and chronic inflammation of nasal and sinonasal regions with numerous plasma cell (PC) infiltrations
| Antibodies | EMP | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 34.4% | 100% | 0.000 | |
| 43.8% | 100% | 0.001 | |
| 56.3% | 0 | 0.011 | |
| 96.9% | 0 | 0.000 |
The major phenotypic differences of EMP and SPB
| Antibodies | EMP | SPB | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18.7% | 57.1% | 0.004 | |
| 31.3% | 81.0% | 0.000 | |
| 43.8% | 15.0% | 0.032 | |
| 56.3% | 23.8% | 0.020 |