Central nervous system (CNS) solitary fibrous tumors (SFTs) are rare mesenchymal neoplasms recognized less than a decade ago. Approximately 60 cases of SFT have been reported in the central nervous system. We describe three atypical SFTs of the CNS, two intracranial and one within the spine. One intracranial SFT arose from the sella turcica and expanded into the suprasellar areas. It relapsed twice during the 3 years following partial resection, and the MiB 1 labeling index steadily increased without obvious malignant transformation. The second SFT arose from the confluence of the sinuses, widely invaded the lateral sinus and adjacent bones, had a low MiB 1 index and has not recurred after 5 years. The intraspinal tumor occurred at T5-T7 in a patient with multiple café-au-lait spots, was predominantly myxoid and developed a second similar lesion at S3-S5 14 years later. The MiB 1 index was lower in the second tumor. Immunohistochemistry confirmed that all were SFTs. These atypical presentations gave us an opportunity to provide further information about the natural histological course of CNS SFTs.

Primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) is a rare subtype of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) with extranodal location affecting only the CNS, meninges and eye, without visceral or lymph node involvement. Its incidence has increased sharply over the past three decades, especially in immunocompetent subjects. Most PCNSL cases are diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCLs). However, it differs from nodal DLBCL in that it has a worse prognosis. DLBCLs are a heterogeneous entity and according to new genomic discoveries, classifications into prognostic subgroups have been embarked upon. Two prognostic algorithms were then prepared using a panel of immunohistochemical markers (CD10, Bcl6, MUM1/IRF-4, and Bcl2), thus categorizing DLBCL into two subgroups, GCB (germinal centre B-cell-like) or non-GCB, and into Group 1 or Group 2. Our goal is to apply both of these two sub-classifications to 39 PCNSLs, in order to assess their usefulness and prognostic relevance. 74.3% of our PCNSLs were of a non-GCB phenotype, corresponding to an activated postgerminal origin. They were evenly distributed across G1 and G2. Two- and 5-year overall survival rates were 34.8% and 19.6%, respectively. Younger age (<65) and a therapeutic combination of chemotherapy and radiotherapy significantly improved our patients' survival rates. The other clinical or biological markers tested had no prognostic impact. The two classifications did not reveal any significant survival difference. The recent discovery of a specific "transcriptional signature" of PCNSL, marking them out of DLBCL could account for the irrelevance of such prognostic classifications to PCNSL.

No abstract

The aim of the study was to analyze the medical and economic interest of OSNA molecular technique, compared to conventional postoperative histopathologic evaluation for sentinel lymph node exploration in breast cancer patients. This retrospective cost-benefit study was conducted in the French Universitary Hospital of Saint Etienne on patients who received sentinel lymph node exploration between July 1, 2007 and December 31, 2009. Lymph nodes were analyzed by conventional postoperative histological evaluation in group 1 (82 patients) and OSNA in group 2 (86 patients). Costs were analyzed in three different ways: surgery cost, hospitalization cost and histopathologic cost. Average operating time was slightly shorter for group 1 (histology) [71.9 vs. 76.8 min for group 2 (OSNA)]. Time and operating costs were not significantly different (p = 0.293). The average cost of pathological examination was significantly higher in group 2 (35.04 euros per node in group 1 vs. 291.84 euros per node in group 2 p < 10(-3)). The average length of hospital stay was significantly longer in group 1 (5.4 days in group 1 vs. 4.2 days in group 2, p = 0.0065). The total costs were not significantly different between both groups (3,774.6 euros in group 1 vs. 3,393.9 euros in group 2 p = 0.055). The sentinel lymph node analysis with OSNA technique does not lead to higher expenses. It also avoids another surgery for 20% of patients. A prospective multicentric medico-economic study made with a larger effective would probably confirm these results.

No abstract