Primary intraosseous rhabdomyosarcomas are extremely rare. Recently two studies reported 4 cases of primary intraosseous rhabdomyosarcoma with EWSR1/FUS-TFCP2 gene fusions, associated with somewhat conflicting histologic features, ranging from spindle to epithelioid. In this study we sought to further investigate the pathologic and molecular abnormalities of a larger group of intraosseous rhabdomyosarcomas by a combined approach using targeted RNA sequencing analysis and fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH). We identified 7 cases, 3 males and 4 females, all in young adults, age range 20-39 years (median 27 years). Three cases involved the pelvis, 2 involved the femur and 1 each involved the maxilla and the skull. Molecular studies identified recurrent gene fusions in all 7 cases tested, including: a novel MEIS1-NCOA2 fusion in 2 cases, EWSR1-TFCP2 in 3 cases and FUS-TFCP2 gene fusions in 1 case. One case showed a FUS gene rearrangement, without a TFCP2 gene abnormality by FISH. The MEIS1-NCOA2 positive cases were characterized by a more primitive and fascicular spindle cell appearance, while the EWSR1/FUS rearranged tumors had a hybrid spindle and epithelioid phenotype, with more abundant eosinophilic cytoplasm and mild nuclear pleomorphism. Immunohistochemically, all tumors were positive for desmin and myogenin (focal). In addition, 4 tumors with TFCP2 associated gene fusions also co-expressed ALK and Cytokeratin. In conclusion, our results suggest a high incidence of gene fusions in primary rhabdomyosarcomas of bone, with two molecular subsets emerging, defined by either MEIS1-NCOA2 or EWSR1/FUS-TFCP2 fusions, showing distinct morphology and immunophenotype. Additional studies with larger numbers of cases and

Myoepithelial carcinoma (MECA) is an underrecognized challenging entity with a broad morphologic spectrum. Misinterpreting MECA is not uncommon as distinguishing it from its mimics, especially cellular myoepithelial-rich pleomorphic adenoma (PA), can be difficult. We described 21 histologically challenging cases of MECAs (16 MECA ex-PA and 5 MECA de novo). All MECAs ex-PA were intracapsular or minimally invasive except for 3 cases. Eighteen (86%) were initially misinterpreted as benign neoplasms, including PA (10), atypical PA (5), and myoepithelioma (3). The remaining 3 were initially diagnosed as malignant (MECA ex-PA) but were histologically challenging. Histologic features that were found most helpful in recognizing the malignant nature of MECA included: uniformly cellular myoepithelial proliferation with an expansile nodular lobulated pattern (all cases) and alternate hypocellular and hypercellular zonal distribution (76% of cases). Among the 16 MECA patients with follow-up, 14 (87.5%) progressed: 10 developed local recurrence and 5 distant metastases. In contrast, only one of 33 patients with cellular PA (control group) recurred locally. Ten of the 14 MECAs that progressed were MECA ex-PA, and 12 (85%) had an initial benign diagnosis. Two patients with MECA ex-PA died of their disease; one had an initial diagnosis of PA. MECA is a histologically challenging entity that closely mimics PA and seems to carry a significant risk of recurrence. Areas of clonal appearing cellular myoepithelial growth with an expansile nodular lobulated pattern and zonal cellular distribution distinguish the majority of MECAs and may serve as useful diagnostic histologic features to differentiate MECA from its benign mimics.

Recent molecular advances have shed significant light on the classification of vascular tumours. Except for haemangiomas, vascular lesions remain difficult to diagnose, owing to their rarity and overlapping clinical, radiographic and histological features across malignancies. In particular, challenges still remain in the differential diagnosis of epithelioid vascular tumours, including epithelioid haemangioma and epithelioid haemangioendothelioma at the benign/low‐grade end of the spectrum, and epithelioid angiosarcoma at the high‐grade end. Historically, the classification of vascular tumours has been heavily dependent on the clinical setting and histological features, as traditional immunohistochemical markers across the group have often been non‐discriminatory. The increased application of next‐generation sequencing in clinical practice, in particular targeted RNA sequencing (such as Archer, Illumina), has led to numerous novel discoveries, mainly recurrent gene fusions (e.g. those involving FOS, FOSB, YAP1, and WWTR1), which have resulted in refined tumour classification and improved diagnostic reproducibility for vascular tumours. However, other molecular alterations besides fusions have been discovered in vascular tumours, including somatic mutations (e.g. involving GNA family and IDH genes) in a variety of haemangiomas, as well as copy number alterations in high‐grade angiosarcomas (e.g. MYC amplifications). Moreover, the translation of these novel molecular abnormalities into diagnostic ancillary markers, either fluorescence in‐situ hybridisation probes or surrogate immunohistochemical markers (FOSB, CAMTA1, YAP1, and MYC), has been remarkable. This review will focus on the latest molecular discoveries covering both benign and malignant vascular tumours, and will provide practical diagnostic algorithms, highlighting frequently encountered pitfalls and challenges in the diagnosis of vascular lesions.