• 2018-07
  • 2018-10
  • 2018-11
  • 2019-04
  • 2019-05
  • 2019-06
  • 2019-07
  • 2019-08
  • 2019-09
  • 2019-10
  • 2019-11
  • 2019-12
  • 2020-01
  • 2020-02
  • 2020-03
  • 2020-04
  • 2020-05
  • 2020-06
  • 2020-07
  • 2020-08
  • 2020-09
  • 2020-10
  • 2020-11
  • 2020-12
  • 2021-01
  • 2021-02
  • 2021-03
  • 2021-04
  • 2021-05
  • 2021-06
  • 2021-07
  • 2021-08
  • fluvastatin sale We obtained two bands in RT PCR


    We obtained two bands in RT-PCR for detection of SERPIN1-FOSB fusion when Taq DNA polymerase was used (Fig. 3A). Genuine RT-PCR product of SERPIN1-FOSB fusion was proved to be the shorter one (733 fluvastatin sale pairs) by sequencing, and the longer band (863 base pairs) was shown to be derived from native SERPINE1 gene by sequencing. Since the 3′ side half sequence of the reverse primer is complementary to the sequence in SERPINE1 exon 5 (886–894 in NM_000602), it is reasonable to consider that native SERPINE1 sequence could be amplifiable under some condition. Amplification of the native SERPINE1 cDNA by RT-PCR might mean the heterozygous abnormality of the fusion. Unlike the result using Taq DNA polymerase, PCR using MightyAmp DNA polymerase showed single band. Since PCR steps were different between Taq DNA polymerase (three steps) and MightyAmp DNA polymerase (two steps), the difference of RT-PCR results might be due to the difference of DNA polymerases themselves and/or PCR conditions. The precise mechanism remains to be clarified. FOSB signals by IHC were detected in nuclei and cytoplasm in the present case of PHE/ES-HE with SERPIN1-FOSB fusion/FOSB rearrangement, while fluvastatin sale they were observed in only nuclei in a hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. The difference of FOSB staining pattern might be related with underlying mechanisms (FOSB rearrangement versus activated signal transduction). On the other hand, such signals were detected in neither an EHE case nor an ES case with other genetic backgrounds (WWTR1-CAMTA1 fusion [25] or INI1 mutation [26]). We consider that FOSB IHC could detect FOSB-rearranged tumors including PHE/ES-HE, but further examination in more cases of various tumors including PHE/ES-HE is needed to clarify the possibility. Recently, there was a marked progress in the genetic analyses of endothelial tumors. Errani [25] and Antonescu [27] found WWTR1-CAMTA1 fusion and YAP1-TFE3 fusion in EHE. Although EHE is one of the several HE types, it is clinicopathologically different from PHE/ES-HE. EHE typically has intracytoplasmic vacuoles with or without erythrocytes, suggesting that it might be of endothelial origin. On the other hand, PHE/ES-HE has no vasoformative features. These findings suggest that different genetic events in the endothelial progenitors might result in different histological features in various types of HEs. Moreover, Antonescu [28] found ZFP36-FOSB or WWTR1-FOSB fusion in epithelioid hemangioma (EH) (9 out of 46 cases). Although FOSB-rearranged EH is morphologically different from SERPINE1-FOSB fusion-positive PHE/ES-HE, oncogenic activation of FOSB might be a common and an important event in the pathogenesis of endothelial tumors in both benign and malignant ones. It is interesting that FOSB-rearrangement was disproportionately often identified in penile EH (4 out of 9 cases), compared to other site EH (5 out of 37 cases).
    Conflict of interest
    Source of funding
    Ethical approval
    Primary bone tumors are rare malignancies, with an incidence of 10 new cases per year per million inhabitants in the United States. Osteosarcomas (OSs), chondrosarcomas (CSs), and Ewing sarcomas (ESs) represent 35%, 25%, and 20% of these tumors, respectively. OS occurs mainly in adolescents, with a peak incidence at the age of 18 years, and is characterized by bone formation and osteolytic lesions. CS occurs only in adults, with a peak incidence at the age of 45 years, and is characterized by production of cartilage matrix, high bone remodeling, and poor vascularity. ES occurs mostly in children and adolescents, with a peak incidence at the age of 15 years, and is characterized by marked osteolysis with a periosteal reaction and frequent soft tissue invasion. Despite their common origin, these three bone tumors have a distinct differentiation status. OS and CS presumably arise from the same multipotent mesenchymal stem cell (MSC), which is able to differentiate into the osteoblast or chondrocyte lineage, respectively., Even if the molecular origin of OS and CS is not clearly defined, loss of function of p53 is observed in >50% of these tumors. ES shares a typical chromosomal translocation in >90% of cases linking the gene on chromosome 22q12 to a member of the gene family, most commonly to on 11q24, leading to an aberrant transcription factor that promotes tumorigenicity and inhibits mesenchymal differentiation. In opposition to OSs and CSs, ESs are poorly differentiated tumors, originally classified in the primitive neuroectodermal tumors. In fact, ESs presumably also derive from MSCs, in which EWS-FLI1 induces expression of various neuronal markers., ,