Reading assignment

Clinical Cases in Mineral and Bone Metabolism 2012; 9(2): 92-9592

Epidemiology and classification of bone tumors

Alessandro Franchi

Division of Pathological Anatomy, Department of Critical Care Medicine and Surgery, University of Florence Medical School, Florence, Italy

Address for correspondence: Alessandro Franchi, MD Division of Anatomic Pathology Department of Critical Care Medicine and Surgery University of Florence Largo Brambilla 3 50134, Florence, Italy Phone: +39 055 4478102 Fax: + 39 055 4379868 E-mail: [email protected]

Summary

Primary bone tumors are uncommon and this has certainly contributed to the scarcity of data about their relative fre- quency, and to the limited understanding of the risk factors. Overall, bone sarcomas account for 0.2% of all malignan- cies, and the adjusted incidence rate for all bone and joint malignancies is 0.9 per 100,000 persons per year, while the 5-year overall survival rate is 67.9%. The age specific in- cidence rates of bone sarcomas show a bimodal distribu- tion, with a first peak occurring in the second decade, and a second peak occurring in patients older than sixty, in re- lation with the age distribution of the main histological subtypes. Several bone tumor types occur in the setting of inherited syndromes, while some other develop in asso- ciation with non-neoplastic precursors or in the setting of previous benign tumors. In recent years, significant ad- vances have occurred in the molecular and cytogenetic cha- racterization of benign and malignant bone tumors. The de- tection of clonal chromosomal aberrations, specific mole- cular genetic changes, and the identification of growth re- lated tumor cell signaling pathways have resulted in a bet- ter understanding of the pathogenesis of several neopla- stic entities, and have provided the basis for an improve- ment in the diagnostic workup and differential diagnosis of several bone tumors presenting with overlapping clinical, radiological and pathological features, as well as for the identification of new prognostic factors and therapeutic tar- gets.

KEY WORDS: bone tumors; epidemiology; classification; pathology.

Epidemiology of bone tumors

Primary bone tumors are relatively uncommon and this has certainly limited the collection of data about their relative fre-

quency and to the insufficient understanding of the risk fac- tors. Although the incidence of benign bone tumors is higher than the incidence of primary malignant tumors, it is likely that benign lesions are underestimated because they often are asymptomatic and not clinically recognized. In addition, primary bone tumors are outnumbered by metastases from carcinomas, melanoma, or hematologic malignancies, such as plasmacytoma. According to the analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Cancer Statistics Review of the Na- tional Cancer Institute, it is estimated that 2,810 men and women (1,620 men and 1,190 women) will be diagnosed with and 1,490 men and women will die of cancer of the bones and joints in 2011 (1). Overall, bone sarcomas account for 0.2% of all malignancies diagnosed in the United States, and the age adjusted incidence rate for all bone and joint mali- gnancies is 0.9 per 100,000 persons per year. The overall 5- year relative survival for 2001-2007 was 66.3% and the age- adjusted death rate based on patients who died in 2004- 2008 in the US, was 0.4 per 100,000 men and women per year (1). In Italy, according to the 2006 report on tumors by the AIR- TUM (Association of Italian Tumor Registries) primary mali- gnant bone tumors represented 0.2% of all malignancies dia- gnosed in males and females in the period 1998-2002, while mortality represented 0.3% of all cancer deaths in both sexes in the same period (2). In the area covered by the Ita- lian Network of Cancer Registries, there were on average 1.3 new bone malignant tumors diagnosed per 100,000 males/year and 1.1 per 100,000 females/year (2). Overall, in the year 2002, there were 208 deaths in Italy due to bone cancer among males and 145 among females. As expected, bone cancer was relevant among young subjects, since more than 50% of cases were diagnosed before the age of 59 years (2). The cumulative risk (0-74 years) of developing a bone cancer was 0.9‰ among males (1 case every 1,099 men) and about 0.7‰ among females (1 case every 1,370 women) while the cumulative risk of dying from this cancer was 0.5‰ among males and 0.4‰ among females, respecti- vely (2). Incidence rates for primary malignant tumors of bo- ne vary considerably across Italy, with a ratio between areas with higher and lower rates of approximately 3 to 4 times (2). These differences may be explained, at least in part, by the use of different coding rules for the bone site, which may ha- ve determined the inclusion, especially for cancer deaths, of secondary tumors (2). Considering time trends, bone cancer shows a stable incidence over time, while mortality is de- creasing. The most frequently diagnosed histologic subtypes were chondrosarcoma (30% in males and 29% in females), osteosarcoma (16% in males and 17% in females) Ewing’s sarcoma (14% in both males and females) and chordoma (8% in males and 5% in females) (2). The age specific incidence rates of bone sarcomas typically show a bimodal distribution, with a first peak occurring in the second decade, and a second peak occurring in patients ol- der than sixty years of age. This is related to the different age distribution of the main histological subtypes, since Ewing’s sarcoma and osteosarcoma are the most frequent

Mini-review

0344 8 Epidemiology_Franchi:- 13-09-2012 16:42 Pagina 92

Clinical Cases in Mineral and Bone Metabolism 2012; 9(2): 92-95 93

Epidemiology and classification of bone tumors

histologic subtypes in the first two decades, while chondro- sarcoma, malignant fibrous histiocytoma, chordoma and se- condary osteosarcoma show an increased incidence after the fourth decade. On the other hand, the majority of benign bone tumors and tumor-like lesions occur in the first two de- cades of life. In general, there is no significant gender predi- lection, although some tumors (e.g. Paget’s sarcoma, chor- doma) show a higher prevalence in males. According to SEER data, in the period 2004-2008, the median age at dia- gnosis for cancer of the bones and joints was 40 years of age. Approximately 29.0% were diagnosed under age 20; 15.4% between 20 and 34; 10.5% between 35 and 44; 13.0% between 45 and 54; 11.4% between 55 and 64; 8.3% between 65 and 74; 9.1% between 75 and 84; and 3.5% over 85 years of age (1). Several bone tumors may occur in the setting of inherited syndromes, but their histopathologic features do not differ from those of sporadic cases (3, 4). Moreover, although the majority of primary bone malignancies arise de novo, there is increasing evidence that some develop in association with non-neoplastic precursors or in the setting of previous beni- gn tumors. Paget’s disease of bone, previous radiation the- rapy, and cartilaginous dysplasias are some of the most well known precancerous conditions for the development of bone sarcomas. The risk of developing a primary malignant tumor of bone is variable according to the related condition (5). Hi- gh risk precursors are represented by Ollier’s disease and Maffucci syndrome, familial retinoblastoma syndrome and Rothmund Thompson syndrome, while conditions represen- ting a moderate risk include multiple osteochondromas, Pa- get’s disease and radiation osteitis. A low risk for malignant transformation has been associated with fibrous dysplasia, bone infarct, chronic osteomyelitis, prosthetic implants, osteogenesis imperfecta, giant cell tumor, osteoblastoma and chondroblastoma (5).

The classification of bone tumors

In general, a widely accepted histopathological classification responds to the need of using reproducible diagnostic criteria and categories, which is a prerequisite for the prediction of the biological potential of a tumor, thus finally representing a guide for treatment. Moreover, a consistent classification of tumors allows to understand their intrinsic biology and to identify specific phenotypes and genetic alterations, which in turn may help in the diagnosis. Bone tumors are currently classified according to the line of differentiation of neoplastic cells and their resemblance to normal counterparts. These criteria can be easily applied to cartilage-forming or bone-forming tumors, while others lack a recognizable differentiation that can link them to a normal tis- sue, like for example Ewing’s sarcoma. Another key aspect to be considered is that the cell of origin of mesenchymal tu- mors is unknown. Moreover, no precursor lesions have been identified, unlike epithelial tumors, which often recognize a multistep process of carcinogenesis. It is largely believed that sarcomagenesis occurs through molecular alterations af- fecting mesenchymal stem cells ultimately inducing a neopla- stic differentiation program, which further results in a specific phenotype. On these bases, the current WHO classification of primary bone tumors has abandoned the concepts of hi- stogenesis and cell of origin of the tumor, to focus on a com- bination of parameters that include morphology, phenotype and genotype (5). Primary benign and malignant bone tumors are grouped in 15 different categories, including cartilage, osteogenic, fibro- genic, fibrohistiocytic, hematopoietic, giant cell, notochordal,

smooth muscle, vascular, lipogenic, and neural tumors, Ewing sarcoma/primitive neuroectodermal tumor, miscella- neous tumors and lesions, and joint lesions. At variance with the classification scheme adopted for soft tissue tumors, only benign and malignant categories are recognized, while in the former a group of tumors with intermediate behavior is inclu- ded. However, the introduction of a category of tumors with intermediate behavior, both locally aggressive and rarely me- tastasizing, could improve this scheme, with regards for example to giant cell tumor of bone, which is currently classi- fied as a benign tumor, or to some vascular neoplasms, like epithelioid hemangioma (6).

Evolving concepts and new entities

The advances in the characterization of the molecular phe- notype of tumor cells has determined relevant changes in the classification schemes, with the disappearance of some enti- ties and the inclusion of new ones. Moreover, after the publi- cation of the WHO classification of bone and soft tissue tu- mors, new emerging entities, as well as older ones, have been characterized and reported, and these will be probably included in the next revision of this classification. Hereafter, some examples are discussed. Hemangiopericytoma of bone is no longer recognized as a true separate entity, but rather as a morphological growth pattern which is common to different tumor types, including infantile myofibromatosis, phosphaturic mesenchymal tumor, synovial sarcoma, solitary fibrous tumor among primary tu- mors, and metastatic meningioma among secondary ones (7). Another tumor type whose existence as a separate true diagnostic category has been deeply reconsidered in the pa- st decades is malignant fibrous histiocytoma (MFH). Indeed, since fibroblast and its variants are the predominant cell ty- pes found in these tumors, it has been suggested that the diagnostic entity MFH should be rather classified as a pleo- morphic fibrosarcoma (8). Moreover, the use of ancillary te- chniques, including immunohistochemistry and electron mi- croscopy, may help to more precisely classify high grade pleomorphic sarcomas in specific categories, such as for example leiomyosarcoma or myofibrosarcoma, or to recogni- ze metastatic tumors, such as melanoma or sarcomatoid car- cinoma. Another recent interesting advance in the field of bone and soft tissue tumors, has been the recognition that myoepithe- lial neoplasms may occur primarily at these sites, which are otherwise entirely devoid of myoepithelial cells. This further underlines the concept of a non-feasibility of a histogenetic approach to the classification of bone and soft tissue tumors. Indeed, these tumors show the same morphological spec- trum as their salivary gland counterparts, including the pre- sence of an epithelial component, in which case they are better regarded as mixed tumors. They occur both in adults and in children, and, in most cases, behave in a benign/lo- cally aggressive fashion (9). A subset of these lesions shows features of malignancy and follows a metastasizing clinical course (10). Recently, it has been shown that primary myoe- pitheliomas of bone frequently present EWSR1 gene rear- rangement, a feature that could be useful in the diagnosis of difficult cases (11). The WHO classification currently recognizes chordoma, whi- ch is defined as a low to intermediate grade malignant tumor that recapitulates notochord, as the only member of the group of tumors of the notochord (5). However, several re- ports support the existence of notochord-type lesions of the axial skeleton that are radiologically and histologically di- stinct from chordoma (12, 13). These lesions appear to be

0344 8 Epidemiology_Franchi:- 13-09-2012 16:42 Pagina 93

Clinical Cases in Mineral and Bone Metabolism 2012; 9(2): 92-9594

A. Franchi

benign and should therefore be recognized by radiologists and pathologists and treated conservatively. The relationship of these lesions to chordoma remains an open question, although it has been suggested that these benign lesions may undergo malignant transformation to classic chordomas (12, 13). Oncogenic osteomalacia is an unusual variant of osteomala- cia, in which systemic bone demineralization is determined by and may be cured by resection of a neoplasm. Although most examples reported in the literature of this rare disease have been associated with soft tissue and bone tumors of various types, it has been recently recognized that many of these tumors have, indeed, a quite distinctive histological ap- pearance (14). They are characterized by an admixture of spindle cells, osteoclast-like giant cells, microcysts, ectatic blood vessels, cartilage-like matrix, and bone formation. The term “phosphaturic mesenchymal tumor, mixed connective tissue variant” (PMTMCT) has been coined to describe these unique lesions. These tumors overexpress fibroblast growth factor-23 (FGF-23), a recently described protein capable of inhibiting renal tubular epithelial phosphate transport, and this is now thought to be the pathogenetic mechanism un- derlying most cases of oncogenic osteomalacia. Immunohi- stochemistry and RT-PCR for FGF23 has been recognized as a sensitive and specific method for confirming the diagno- sis of PMTMCT both in patients with and without oncogenic osteomalacia (14, 15). Improved recognition of the histologic spectrum of these tumors, including the existence of mali- gnant forms, should allow distinction from other mesenchy- mal tumors (14). The correct diagnosis of PMTMCT is criti- cal, as complete resection cures intractable oncogenic osteomalacia.

The contribution of genetics to the diagnosis and classification of bone tumors

In recent years, an increasing amount of genetic data has become available for bone tumors, which had a profound im- pact on their diagnosis and classification. Although the majo- rity of primary malignant bone tumors, including osteosarco- ma, chondrosarcoma and chordoma, carry nonspecific gene- tic changes within a background of a complex karyotype, others, like Ewing’s sarcoma, present tumor-specific chromo- somal translocation. The identification of tumor specific tran- slocations in Ewing’s sarcoma, mainly the t (11;22)(q24;q12), have had a major impact in understanding the pathogenesis of this enigmatic small blue round cell tumor, and furnished the basis for its classification as tumor with neuroectodermal differentiation. Moreover, tumor specific translocations such as those identified in Ewing’s sarcoma represent a molecular diagnostic tool to assist the pathologist in the diagnosis and in detecting minimal residual disease. More recently, further molecular abnormalities have been identified in primary bone tumors, some of which appear cha- racteristic of single tumor types. These findings are fostering new changes in the classification of bone tumors. A signifi- cant example may be aneurysmal bone cyst (ABC). This is a benign bone lesion described in 1942 by Jaffe and Lichten- stein and until recently considered as a reactive process with the potential for local recurrence. The term secondary ABC has been used to designate those lesions occurring in asso- ciation with other processes, mainly fibrous dysplasia, chon- droblastoma, osteoblastoma and giant cell tumor of bone. The identification of a recurrent chromosomal translocation t (16;17)(q22; p13) has supported the notion that at least a subset of ABC have a neoplastic nature (16-18). This tran- slocation fuses the promoter region of the osteoblast cadhe-

rin 11 gene (CDH11) on chromosome 16q22 to the entire co- ding sequence of the ubiquitin protease TRE17/USP6 gene on chromosome 17p13 (19). Interestingly, this translocation is present only in the spindle cell component of primary ABC, and it is not detected in secondary ABC. Recent observa- tions indicate that the cells affected by TRE17 rearrange- ment and overexpression in ABC are indeed immature osteo- blasts (20), and that TRE17 appears to simultaneously inhibit osteoblast maturation and stimulate osteoclast activity, thus favoring the growth of ABC. Altogether, these findings sup- port the notion that primary ABC is a mesenchymal neopla- sm possibly of the osteoblastic lineage, whereas secondary ABC, although morphologically similar to primary ABC, most likely represents a common endpoint of differentiation in va- rious non-ABC bone tumors.

Conclusions

Primary malignant bone tumors are rare and as such they re- present a difficult category of tumors for appropriate recogni- tion, classification and treatment. Although the occurrence of bone sarcomas is low, they affect particularly children and adolescents, which implies that they have a major impact on the life of patients and their families. In recent years, advan- ces in medical and surgical treatment modalities have resul- ted in an improvement of the outcome and survival of pri- mary malignant bone tumors. This has been paralleled by si- gnificant developments in the molecular and cytogenetic cha- racterization, which in combination with light/electron micro- scopy and immunohistochemical techniques, has contributed to a better understanding of this group of tumors.

References

1. http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/ 1975_2008/results_single/ sect_01_ta- ble.01.pdf.

2. http://www.registri-tumori.it/cms/?q=sede_osso. 3. Hauben EI, Arends J, Vandenbroucke JP, et al. Multiple primary

malignancies in osteosarcoma patients. Incidence and predictive value of osteosarcoma subtype for cancer syndromes related with osteosarcoma. Eur J Hum Genet 2003;11:611-8.

4. Hameetman L, Bovée JV, Taminiau AH, et al. Multiple osteo- chondromas: clinicopathological and genetic spectrum and sug- gestions for clinical management. Hered Cancer Clin Pract 2004;2:161-73.

5. Fletcher CDM, Unni KK, Mertens F. World Health Organization Clas- sification of Tumours. Pathology and Genetics of Tumours of Soft Tissue and Bone. Lyon: IARC Press; 2002.

6. Verbeke SL, Bovée JV. Primary vascular tumors of bone: a spec- trum of entities? Int J Clin Exp Pathol 2011;4:541-51.

7. Verbeke SL, Fletcher CD, Alberghini M, et al. A reappraisal of he- mangiopericytoma of bone; analysis of cases reclassified as sy- novial sarcoma and solitary fibrous tumor of bone. Am J Surg Pathol 2010;34:777-783.

8. Antonescu CR, Erlandson RA, Huvos AG. Primary fibrosarcoma and malignant fibrous histiocytoma of bone. A comparative ultra- structural study: evidence of a spectrum of fibroblastic differentiation. Ultrastruct Pathol 2000;24:83-91.

9. de Pinieux G, Beabout JW, Unni KK, et al. Primary mixed tumor of bone. Skeletal Radiol 2001;30;534-536.

10. Alberghini M, Pasquinelli G, Zanella L, et al. Primary malignant myoepithelioma of the distal femur. APMIS 2007;115:376-380.

11. Antonescu CR, Zhang L, Chang NE, et al. EWSR1-POU5F1 fusion in soft tissue myoepithelial tumors. A molecular analysis of sixty- six cases, including soft tissue, bone, and visceral lesions, showing common involvement of the EWSR1 gene. Genes Chro- mosomes Cancer 2010;49:1114-1124.

0344 8 Epidemiology_Franchi:- 13-09-2012 16:42 Pagina 94

Clinical Cases in Mineral and Bone Metabolism 2012; 9(2): 92-95 95

Epidemiology and classification of bone tumors

12. Yamaguchi T, Suzuki S, Ishiiwa H, et al. Benign notochordal cell tumors: A comparative histological study of benign notochordal cell tumors, classic chordomas, and notochordal vestiges of fetal in- tervertebral discs. Am J Surg Pathol 2004;28:756-761.

13. Kyriakos M. Benign notochordal lesions of the axial skeleton: a re- view and current appraisal. Skeletal Radiol 2011;40:1141-1152.

14. Folpe AL, Fanburg-Smith JC, Billings SD, et al. Most osteomala- cia-associated mesenchymal tumors are a single histopathologic entity: an analysis of 32 cases and a comprehensive review of the literature. Am J Surg Pathol 2004;28:1-30.

15. Bahrami A, Weiss SW, Montgomery E, et al. RT-PCR analysis for FGF23 using paraffin sections in the diagnosis of phosphaturic me- senchymal tumors with and without known tumor induced osteo- malacia. Am J Surg Pathol 2009;33:1348-1354.

16. Panoutsakopoulos G, Pandis N, Kyriazoglou I, et al. Recurrent t(16;17)(q22;p13) in aneurysmal bone cysts. Genes Chromosomes

Cancer 1999;26:265-266. 17. Dal Cin P, Kozakewich HP, Goumnerova L, et al. Variant translo-

cations involving 16q22 and 17p13 in solid variant and extraosseous forms of aneurysmal bone cyst. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 2000;28:233-234.

18. Althof PA, Ohmori K, Zhou M, et al. Cytogenetic and molecular cy- togenetic findings in 43 aneurysmal bone cysts: aberrations of 17p mapped to 17p13.2 by fluorescence in situ hybridization. Mod Pathol 2004;17:518-525.

19. Oliveira AM, Hsi BL, Weremowicz S, et al. USP6 (Tre2) fusion on- cogenes in aneurysmal bone cyst. Cancer Res 2004;64:1920-1923.

20. Lau AW, Pringle LM, Quick L, et al. TRE17/ubiquitin-specific pro- tease 6 (USP6) oncogene translocated in aneurysmal bone cyst blocks osteoblastic maturation via an autocrine mechanism invol- ving bone morphogenetic protein dysregulation. J Biol Chem 2010;285:37111-20.

0344 8 Epidemiology_Franchi:- 13-09-2012 16:42 Pagina 95

Copyright of Clinical Cases in Mineral & Bone Metabolism is the property of CIC Edizioni Internazionali s.r.l.

and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright

holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.