Diagnostic Reliability of CRTC1/3::MAML2 Gene Fusion Transcripts in Discriminating Histologically Similar Intraosseous Mucoepidermoid Carcinoma from Glandular Odontogenic Cyst: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Intraosseous mucoepidermoid carcinoma (IMEC) and Glandular odontogenic cyst (GOC) are those two pathological entities causing diagnostic dilemma due to the histopathological similarity. An accurate distinction between the two entities is difficult as both presents with a common radiological and histological similarities. The aim of our systematic review was to establish the diagnostic reliability of CRTC1/3::MAML2 gene fusion for the distinction between IMEC and GOC. METHODS: A complete electronic literature search was made in MEDLINE by PubMed, Google Scholar, and EMBASE databases. Articles with keywords using molecular genetic findings of CRTC1/3::MAML2 gene fusion transcripts, IMEC and GOC were assessed and included for the systematic review. RESULTS: Twelve subgroups having both qualitative and quantitative analysis revealed CRTC1/3::MAML2 sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 70.59% in differentiating GOC and IMEC. Fixed-effects model confirmed translocation-negative cases to have a decreased risk of association with IMEC (combined odds ratio 8.770, 95% confidence interval - 2.45 to 31.45, p < 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence supports that in all cases with positive gene fusion transcript of the CRTC1/3::MAML2 was specific for IMEC and was significantly differentiating it from GOC. Whereas cases of IMEC with negative gene fusion transcript pose diagnostic difficulty in differentiating from a GOC which is negative for CRTC1/3::MAML2 expression.

Analysis of Human Papilloma Virus Content and Integration in Mucoepidermoid Carcinoma.

Mucoepidermoid Carcinomas (MEC) represent the most common malignancies of salivary glands. Approximately 50% of all MEC cases are known to harbor CRTC1/3-MAML2 gene fusions, but the additional molecular drivers remain largely uncharacterized. Here, we sought to resolve controversy around the role of human papillomavirus (HPV) as a potential driver of mucoepidermoid carcinoma. Bioinformatics analysis was performed on 48 MEC transcriptomes. Subsequent targeted capture DNA sequencing was used to annotate HPV content and integration status in the host genome. HPV of any type was only identified in 1/48 (2%) of the MEC transcriptomes analyzed. Importantly, the one HPV16+ tumor expressed high levels of p16, had high expression of HPV16 oncogenes E6 and E7, and displayed a complex integration pattern that included breakpoints into 13 host genes including PIK3AP1, HIPI, OLFM4,SIRT1, ARAP2, TMEM161B-AS1, and EPS15L1 as well as 9 non-genic regions. In this cohort, HPV is a rare driver of MEC but may have a substantial etiologic role in cases that harbor the virus. Genetic mechanisms of host genome integration are similar to those observed in other head and neck cancers.

Salivary mucoepidermoid carcinoma: histological variants, grading systems, CRTC1/3-MAML2 fusions, and clinicopathological features.

AIMS: To investigate the histological diversity of salivary mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC), its clinicopathological features, and its associations with CRTC1/3-MAML2 fusions. METHODS AND RESULTS: Salivary MEC cases (n = 177) were examined for CRTC1/3-MAML2 fusions, histological variants were classified, and tumours were graded according to four different grading systems. Adverse histological features considered to be unusual in MEC were also investigated. Of the 177 MEC cases, 110 were positive for CRTC1/3-MAML2 fusions. The classical variant was the most frequent in the fusion-positive case group, the fusion-negative case group, and the total case group. The clear/oncocytic variant was the second most frequent in the fusion-positive and total case groups. Oncocytic, Warthin-like and spindle variants were seen in the fusion-positive case group only. Clear cell, sclerosing, mucinous and central variants were seen in both the fusion-positive case group and the fusion-negative case group. No case was classified as a ciliated variant, as a mucoacinar variant, or as a high-grade transformation. As compared with the classical variant, non-classical variants were characterised by frequent CRTC1/3-MAML2 fusions and a low clinical stage in all cases. Of the four histological features considered to be unusual in MEC, marked nuclear atypia, frequent mitoses (>10/10 high-power fields) and extensive necrosis were found independently of the fusion status, and were present in 3-5% of all cases. However, none of the cases showed overt keratinisation. On comparison, the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology and modified Healey grading systems downgraded tumours, the Brandwein system upgraded tumours, and the Memorial Sloan Kettering system provided a moderate means of assessment. CONCLUSION: Recognition of the histological diversity of MEC, its clinicopathological features and its associations with CRTC1/3-MAML2 fusions is helpful for an accurate diagnosis of this carcinoma.

Prognostic impact of CRTC1/3-MAML2 fusions in salivary gland mucoepidermoid carcinoma: A multiinstitutional retrospective study.

Mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC) is rare, but the most common primary malignancy of the salivary gland and not infrequent in young individuals. CRTC1/3-MAML2 fusions are frequently detected in MEC and are useful as a diagnostic biomarker. However, there has been debate as to whether the fusions have prognostic significance. In this study, we retrospectively collected 153 salivary gland MEC cases from 11 tertiary hospitals in Japan. As inclusion criteria, the MEC patients in this study had curative surgery as the initial treatment, received no preoperative treatment, and had no distant metastasis at the time of the initial surgery. The MEC diagnosis was validated by a central pathology review by five expert salivary gland pathologists. The CRTC1/3-MAML2 fusions were detected using FISH and RT-PCR. In 153 MEC cases, 90 (58.8%) were positive for CRTC1/3-MAML2 fusions. During the follow-up period, 28 (18.3%) patients showed tumor recurrence and 12 (7.8%) patients died. The presence of the fusions was associated with favorable tumor features. Of note, none of the fusion-positive patients died during the follow-up period. Statistical analysis showed that the presence of the fusions was a prognostic indicator of a better overall survival in the total and advanced-stage MEC cohorts, but not in the early-stage MEC cohort. In conclusion, CRTC1/3-MAML2 fusions are an excellent biomarker for favorable overall survival of patients with salivary gland MEC.

Mucoepidermoid Carcinoma of the Lacrimal Sac: Clinical-Pathologic Analysis, Including Molecular Genetics.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess whether mucoepidermoid carcinoma of the lacrimal sac is a counterpart of CRTC1/3-MAML2 gene fusion-related salivary gland mucoepidermoid carcinoma. METHODS: In this retrospective observational case series, pathology records were searched for all cases of lacrimal sac mucoepidermoid carcinoma diagnosed between 1990 and 2018. Data collected included demographics, clinical findings, management, and follow-up. Pathologic parameters assessed included tumor morphology, immunohistochemistry, and MAML2 and EGFR fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) studies. RESULTS: Six patients with mucoepidermoid carcinoma of the lacrimal sac, 5 males and 1 female, with a median age of 63 years (range 24-66) were identified. Five tumors were managed with radical resection and 1 patient underwent orbital exenteration. None of the patients developed recurrence or metastases with an average follow-up of 18 months (range 13-23). All tumors had morphologic and immunohistochemical features of mucoepidermoid carcinoma and overexpressed EGFR. MAML2 FISH was negative for MAML2 rearrangement in all tumors. EGFR FISH demonstrated EGFR amplification in 1 tumor. CONCLUSIONS: Mucoepidermoid carcinoma of the lacrimal sac is not a lacrimal sac counterpart of CRTC1/3-MAML2 gene fusion-related salivary gland mucoepidermoid carcinoma. EGFR pathway activation and EGFR amplification in a subset of these neoplasms suggest the potential role for anti-EGFR agents.

Simultaneous metastasized primary unknown signet ring cell carcinoma of the cervical lymph node and mucoepidermoid carcinoma of the parotid gland as double cancers.

Lymph node metastasis from signet ring cellcarcinoma (SRCC) primary unknown is extremely rare. We here report a case of primary-unknown SRCC that metastasized to the cervical lymph nodes, co-existing with mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC) of the parotid gland as a simultaneous double cancer. A 68-year-old female patient with right swollen cervical lymph nodes consulted our medical center. A diagnosis of bilateral cervical lymph node metastasis and a right parotid tumor was made. After bilateral neck dissection and right parotidectomy, the pathological diagnosis was SRCC of primary unknown with metastasis to the cervical lymph node and MEC of the parotid gland. Examination of the CRTC1/3-MAML2 fusion gene showed no relation between SRCC of primary unknown with metastasis to the cervical lymph node and MEC of the parotid gland. Ten months after the first treatment, there was recurrence in the left neck lymph node, and left neck dissection was performed. Fourteen months after the first treatment, the patient is alive and cancer-free. This case is the fourth report of SRCC with lymph node metastasis, and highlights the value of fusion gene detection to determine relatedness between simultaneous cancers. Moreover, such cases should be closely monitored for the subsequent appearance of distant metastases.

Postoperative radiotherapy for T1/2N0M0 mucoepidermoid carcinoma positive for CRTC1/3-MAML2 fusions.

BACKGROUND: The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend considering postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) for completely resected T1/2N0M0 salivary mucoepidermoid carcinomas when they show tumor spillage, perineural invasion, or intermediate/high-grade histology. CRTC1/3-MAML2 fusions have been associated with a favorable clinical outcome. METHODS: Forty-seven T1/2N0M0 mucoepidermoid carcinoma cases positive for CRTC1/3-MAML2 fusions were completely resected and were not treated with PORT. RESULTS: Pathologically, none of the cases showed tumor spillage or perineural invasion. Cases with intermediate/high-grade histology numbered 9 (19%) to 26 (55%) with the currently used 3 different grading systems. During the follow-up (median 60 months), locoregional tumor recurrence occurred in 4 cases, which were treated with surgery alone. At the last follow-up (median 60 months; 7-160), all patients were alive with no evidence of disease. CONCLUSION: An excellent prognosis may be achieved without PORT in T1/2N0M0 mucoepidermoid carcinoma patients positive for CRTC1/3-MAML2 fusions when the tumors are completely resected without tumor spillage.

Correlation of Crtc1/3-Maml2 fusion status, grade and survival in mucoepidermoid carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: Mucoepidermoid carcinoma (MEC) is the most common malignant tumor of the salivary glands. Tumor stage and grade have historically been important predictors of survival. An oncogenic CRTC1- or CRTC3-MAML2 gene fusion has been identified in a number of MECs. Historically, these gene fusions have been associated with lower grade tumors and better survival. However, reported gene fusion rates and prognosis varies widely across studies, and have not controlled for tumor grade. We sought to identify gene fusion rates and outcomes in our cohort of MEC patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An IRB-approved retrospective cohort of patients with MEC was identified at the University of Michigan. Clinical, histologic, and outcome data was collected from medical records. RNA was isolated from formalin fixed paraffin-embedded tumor sections, and qRT-PCR was performed to identify CRTC1/3-MAML2 gene fusions. Sanger sequencing of qRT-PCR products was used to confirm gene fusions. RESULTS: Overall, 90 patient MEC tumors were collected (58 low-grade, 25 intermediate-grade, and 7 high-grade). Gene fusions were identified in 59% (53/90) of tumors. On univariate and bivariate analysis, fusion status did not significantly associate with grade or survival. CONCLUSION: We have identified a high rate of CRTC1/3-MAML2 gene fusions in a large cohort of MEC. We do not identify any correlation between fusion status with tumor grade or survival. These findings suggest further characterization of MECs is needed before considering the CRTC1/3-MAML2 gene fusion as a prognostic biomarker. Additional genetic drivers may account for survival and grade in MECs.

[New developments in molecular diagnostics of carcinomas of the salivary glands: "translocation carcinomas"]. / Novinky v molekulární diagnostice karcinomu slinných zláz: "translokacní karcinomy".

In recent years the discovery of translocations and the fusion oncogenes that they result in has changed the way diagnoses are made in salivary gland pathology. These genetic aberrations are recurrent; and at the very least serve as powerful diagnostic tools in salivary gland tumors diagnosis and classification. They also show promise as prognostic markers and hopefully as targets of therapy. In this review the 4 carcinomas currently known to harbor translocations will be discussed, namely mucoepidermoid carcinoma, adenoid cystic carcinoma, mammary analogue secretory carcinoma, and hyalinizing clear cell carcinoma. The discovery and implications of each fusion will be highlighted and how they have helped to reshape the current classification of salivary gland tumors.