MDM2 Testing In Lipomatous Tumors: An Institutional Experience with 1,161 Neoplasms

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

Abstract Introduction/Objective Amplifications of the MDM2 gene is a well-recognized central molecular event in atypical lipomatous tumors, well-differentiated liposarcomas, and dedifferentiated liposarcomas. However, given the fact that most adipocytic neoplasms are benign, the specific testing approaches that will maximize the detection of MDM2 amplified tumors in an accurate and cost-efficient manner remains unclear. The purpose of this study is to present our experience with MDM2 testing by FISH in a large cohort of lipomatous neoplasms. Methods/Case Report The pathologic database of an academic medical center was queried for all lipomatous tumors as well as all tumors for which MDM2 testing was performed during a three-year period. At our center, MDM2 testing for well differentiated adipocytic neoplasms is triggered by the so-called “traditional criteria”: a deep tumor and/or tumor size >10 cm and/or recurrence. We also take an expanded approach for a variety of indications that may include equivocal atypia or clinical/imaging concern, among others. Testing is also performed on overt malignancies for which dedifferentiated liposarcoma is a plausible consideration after review of morphologic features. Clinicopathologic data, including patient age of diagnosis, tumor size, depth of tumor, results from MDM2 testing [when performed], anatomic location(s) and recurrence [where applicable], were collected for each patient. Results (if a Case Study enter NA) 1161 cases were assessed, 456 of whom underwent MDM2 testing, and 108 of which were ultimately classified as MDM2 amplified. Standardized bivariable comparisons found that a deep tumor location (p=0.0014) and older age (p=0.0002), but not tumor size at the >10 cm cut off were associated with MDM2 positivity. However, a logistic regression model showed that neither size, depth or age were significantly associated with MDM2 positivity. Among the MDM2-positive cohort, 91% had tumor sizes <10 cm, 14% were superficial, 23% were non-recurrent and 15% were less than the median cohort patient age of 58 years. If the aforementioned “traditional criteria” were used as the sole basis for MDM2 testing, 50 (46.29%) of the 108 cases that were ultimately classified as MDM2 positive would not have been tested. Conclusion Our findings suggest that a strict adherence to “traditional criteria” may result in a significant subset of MDM2 positive tumors not being tested in lipomatous tumors. A more expansive approach that incorporates additional indications for testing, should be evaluated.