SS represents 5–10% of the entire soft tissue tumors and occurs predominantly in young patients with a marked predilection for the upper and lower extremities and tends to occur in the vicinity of joints. [1, 4, 5]
On histology, the majority of SS are monophasic while upto one quarter to one third of the cases are biphasic with epithelial differentiation; the latter can display variable histological pattern like nests, cords or well-formed glands [1]. The spindle cell component in monophasic or biphasic SS is characteristically monomorphic with scant cytoplasm, giving an appearance of blue spindle cell tumor. The mitosis is variable and is required for FNCLCC grading of SS. These characteristic histological features provide a clue for the diagnosis which is further worked up by IHC for confirmation.
The unusual histological pattern in SS like rhabdoid differentiation is sparsely described in literature with only handful of cases [3–6] and authors have attributed this morphological subtype as challenge for diagnosis. This histological pattern is extremely rare and deceptive during histomorphological assessment and often precludes possibility of SS in formulating the list of differential diagnosis. In the presented two cases, the clinical features especially, the site of tumor in the vicinity of joints provoked us to rule out the possibility of SS inspite of very unusal histology.
TLE-1 is a highly sensitive IHC marker for the diagnosis of SS; however, lacks specificity as the immunoexpression can be seen in MPNST, solitary fibrous tumor and angiomatoid fibrous histiocytoma [1]. Hence, the gold standard for the diagnosis of SS is unique t(X;18) (p11;q11) translocation which is routinely demonstrated by BA-FISH for SS18 gene rearrangement. SS18 gene on chromosome 18 is fused to one of the SSX gene; SSX2 or SSX4 on X chromosome, which is genetic hallmark of SS [7].
Recently, new IHC markers like TRPS-1 & novel SS18-SSX fusion specific antibody have emerged with latter being 100% specific for the diagnosis of SS and can obviate the need of translocation (FISH) studies [8, 9]. Cloutier et al [8] have evaluated 165 cases of SS with TRPS-1 IHC and the expression was evident in 86% of the cases, however the specificity of this marker for diagnosis of SS is not well documented
Kohashi et al [2] have evaluated INI-1 immunoexpression in 95 cases of SS and 30 cases of other soft tissue sarcoma. They found reduced expression in 69% (66/95) cases of SS while the protein expression was preserved in remaining cases of SS and all (100%) cases of other soft tissue sarcoma. The study also concluded that status of INI-1 immunoexpression did not affect the prognosis of patients of SS (p = 0.46) and none of the case showed complete loss of INI-1 protein expression. Hence, pattern of INI-1 expression had limited efficacy for prognostication of SS and was more useful for in identifying histological tumor categories. In our both cases exhibiting rhabdoid differentiation, we found significant reduced expression of INI-1 which served as a clue to rule out SS, along with clinical features.
The prognostic implication of rhabdoid differentiation on SS in uncertain due to paucity of cases, however, both our cases had poor prognosis and both cases presented with lung metastasis within 1-1.5 years indicating a more aggressive behaviour of synovial sarcomas with rhabdoid morphology. Wen et al [4] and Machen et al [10] have also attributed the rhabdoid morphology with systemic metastasis and poor prognosis in their findings.
To conclude, rhabdoid differentiation is a rare occurrence in SS, however awareness of this unusual histological feature espoused with correlation of clinical features can help the pathologist to consider SS in the differential diagnosis which can be subsequently confirmed by fusion specific IHC or translocation studies by FISH. The accurate diagnosis is prudent due to distinct prognostic and therapeutic implication of this entity. We propose rhabdoid differentiation in SS is an unfavourable and aggressive histological feature.