Clear Cell Sarcoma of the Kidney – a Review


History

Incidence

Associations

Genetics

Pathology

Characteristics

Staging

Treatment

Radiation:

Stage IV:

Outcome:

References:

 

History

Clear-cell sarcoma of the kidney (CCSK) was first reported by Kidd in 1970, and is characterized by its bone metastasizing tendencies and propensity for late recurrences.

 

Incidence

3-4% of all primary pediatric renal tumours are clear cell sarcoma of the kidney (CCSK); they are classified separately from Wilms tumour. Approximately 20 new cases are diagnosed each year in the United States.

 

Associations

Unlike Wilms tumour, it is not associated with hemihypertrophy and sporadic aniridia.

 

Genetics

The genetics of CCSK are entirely different from Wilms tumor. A t(10;17)(q22;p13) and deletion 14q have been found in some patients. Alterations in the p53 tumour suppressor gene are sometimes seen in CCSK. EGFR pathway regulatory abnormalities have been seen in CCSK. The proto-oncogene c-kit is overexpressed in CCSK. However, the is no gene amplification or activating mutations.

Pathology

CCSK tumours are usually fairly large and are unilateral and unicentric, often arising from the central or medullary portion of the kidney. They have a mucoid texture, foci of necrosis and prominent cyst formation. Intracytoplasmicvesicles are often found and are the basis for the term clear cell sarcoma. The tumor kidney junction is classically well-defined. Any area of nephroblastoma excludes the diagnosis of CCSK.

 

There are 3 types of components:

  1. Septal cell (spindle-shaped) in fibrovascular septa
  2. Cord cell (round or oval)
  3. Intercellular matrix (it has MPS or mucopolysaccharide, hence the name clear cell)

 

Most tumours have a classic pattern: monomorphous with cords/nests of a few cells divided by evenly dispersed small vascular septa. There are multiple other histologic patterns:

 

  1. Myxoid pattern (50%)
  2. Sclerosing pattern (35%)
  3. Cellular pattern (26%)
  4. Epithelioid pattern (trabecular or acinar type) (13%)
  5. Palisading (Verocay body) pattern (11%)
  6. Spindle cell pattern (7%)
  7. Storiform pattern (4%)
  8. Anaplastic pattern (2.6%)

 

In most cases more than one pattern is seen.

 

Classic Pattern

 

 

Metastases may exhibit variant histologic patterns.

Characteristics

NWTS-4 - 86 (59 males and 27 females) CCSK patients were in this study. No patient had bilateral disease (stage V).

 

Age

 

<1y

33%

1-2y

34%

> 2y

19%

Male:Female

59:27

Stage

 

I

35%

II

21%

III

28%

IV

2%

 

 

Table 1. Characteristics of CCSK patients in NWTS-4

 

CCSK has a peak incidence between 3 – 5 years of age with a M:F ratio of 2:1.

 

Staging

1/21 patients in NWTS-4 developed brain mets, compared with 11% of patients in earlier studies. More than 30% of the recurrences occurred between 2 years and 37 months; however, none have been reported after 37 months, in contrast to other prior studies. Bone scans are now standard at diagnosis for CCSK patients in NWTS-5.

 

These tumors have a propensity to metastasise to bone (15 – 17% incidence) giving it the name “bone metastasising renal tumour of childhood” (bone mets are seen in < 2% with Wilms tumor). The other sites of metastasis, in order of frequency are: lung, abdomen, retroperitoneum, brain, and liver. Late onset of first relapse is a distinctive feature even in stage-I tumours and regular post-operative follow up is essential. Earlier reports noted that nearly 20% of CCSKmetastases occurred at least 3 years after diagnosis; rarely even up to 10 years later.

 

Stage I: The tumor is limited to the kidney and is completely resected. The renal capsule is intact, and no evidence of rupture is observed. The vessels of the renal sinus are not involved, and no evidence of tumor at or beyond the margins of resection exists.

Stage II: The tumor extends beyond the kidney but is completely resected. Regional extension of tumor has occurred. Blood vessels outside the renal parenchyma (including those of the renal sinus) may contain tumor. Biopsy is performed on tumors (except by fine needle aspiration), or spillage of the tumor occurs before or during surgery; spillage is confined to the flank and does not involve the peritoneal surface. No evidence of tumor at or beyond the margins of resection is noted.

Stage III: Residual tumor is nonhematogenous and is confined to the abdomen. Stage III criteria are (1) the presence of lymph nodes within the abdomen (renal hilar, para-aortic, or beyond) that demonstrate positive results for tumor, (2) the tumor penetrates the peritoneal surface, (3) the tumor implants on the peritoneal surface, (4) gross or microscopic evidence of the tumor is present after resection, (5) resection is incomplete because of involvement of vital structures, or (6) tumor spillage is not confined to the flank.

Stage IV: Hematogenous metastases (eg, lung, liver, bone, brain) or lymph node metastases extend outside of the abdominopelvic region.

Stage V: Bilateral renal involvement is discovered at diagnosis. Each side is staged individually using the above criteria.

[from ref 1]

 

Treatment

All stages of CCSK are treated with radical nephrectomy. Chemotherapy typically is VCR, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin and etoposide for 24 weeks. Almost all receive radiation therapy (see below)

Radiation:

Only children who are a) Stage I and b) had negative lymph node biopsies are able to avoid radiation therapy to the tumor bed. (Stage 1 children without lymph node sampling are upstaged to stage II.

 

One study found that children treated on arm DD-RT of NWTS-3 (longer treatment duration – 15 months)  had a 64.6% 6-year RFS (relapse free survival), and concluded that longer tx with vincristine, doxorubicin, and dactinomycin for patients with CCSK provides better RFS than a shorter course (6 months), but unfortunately no improvement in overall survival.

 

COG protocol (AREN0321) for all CCSK non-stage IV patients recommends continued treatment as in NWTS-5.

 

Stage IV:

Patients with stage IV undergo treatment with irinotecan and vincristine in an upfront window approach before treatment with cyclophosphamide, etoposide, vincristine, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide.

Outcome:

Overall survival is 69%. In one review, 4 independent prognostic factors were identified after multivariate analysis:

  1. Treatment with doxorubicin
  2. Stage
  3. Age at diagnosis
  4. Tumour necrosis

 

Long term follow up is essential – there are late relapses, even in stage 1 disease. Under current treatment protocols most recurrences are seen within 3 years of the completion of therapy. Best outcome is in Stage I tumors, in kids from 2-4 years of age, and who have no tumor necrosis. Stage IV (distant metastases) or multifocal disease have a worse prognosis – 50% long-term 6-year survival rate.

 

 

Agent

MOA

Cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan, Neosar)

N2 Mustard relative. Alkylating agent. Cross-links DNA

Etoposide (Toposar, VP-16)

Inhibits topoisomerase II and causes DNA strand breakage. There is ‘freezing’ of cell proliferation in late S or early G2 cell cycle

Vincristine (Oncovin)

A vinca alkaloid that mainly inhibits mitosis by inhibiting intracellular tubulin function -> binds to microtubules.

Doxorubicin (Adriamycin, Rubex)

Produces free radicals (DNA degradation). Inhibits topoisomerase II.

Mesna (Mesnex)

Blocks acrolein (a metabolite of cyclophosphamide or iphosphamide that causes hemorrhagic cystitis) by virtue of its free thiol groups.

 

 

 

References:

[http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/993245-overview]

Disk-battery ingestion TEF



Battery Ingestion TEF

Why do disc batteries damage the esophagus? The mechanisms include absorption of toxic substances, electrical injury, pressure necrosis, and caustic injury from leaking battery contents. The size of the battery impacts the risk of esophageal entrapment. Lithium batteries generate twice the voltage (3 V) of alkaline batteries, and are more than twice as likely to cause major injury. The increased use of electronic devices has paralleled the increasing incidence of battery ingestions. Timely and prompt removal is critical.

Recent large series studying the epidemiology demonstrated that children under 6 years swallowed batteries: directly from a product (61.8%), loose (29.8%), or were obtained from battery packaging (8.2%). [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20498172]

There is no consensus on the treatment of post disk-battery ingestion TEF, due of course to the rarity of the condition and the variable clinical scenarios. There are reports of spontaneous healing of the fistula after the total rest of esophageal mucosa with nasojejunal or nasogastric tube
feeding have been reported. [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11879930] [G. Senthilkumaran, S. Crankson, M. Yousef, Spontaneous closure of acquired tracheo-oesophageal ?stula, J. Laryngol. Otol. 110 (1996) 685—687] Several studies recommend this form of management. [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15343469] The duration of esophageal rest is unclear – some have recommended more than 6 weeks of esophageal rest even if the fistula appears closed. [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18316130]

Acute primary repair can be associated with a high incidence of stricture, recurrent fistula, breakdown of the repair, recurrent laryngeal nerve injury, and a substantial mortality rate.

In general, acquired nonmalignant TEFs are managed with delayed surgical repair since the risk of recurrent fistula is increased when significant inflammation is still present. This may not be possible with large symptomatic fistulae. An adult series of 27 patients with acquired TEF noted a mortality rate of 10 with simple repair. [J. Marzelle, P. Dartevelle, J. Khalife, A. Rojas-Miranda, A. Chapelier, P. Levasseur, Surgical management of acquired post-intubation tracheo-oesophageal ?stulas: 27 patients, Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 3 (1989) 499—502, discussion 502—493.]

However, ‘conservative management’ is not risk-free, with a possibility of aspiration and pneumonia, especially with large fistulae, failure of resolution, long hospitalization, or recurrence after confirmed resolution.

When repair is done, in most cases it can be done through the neck. As with congenital TEF, passage of a catheter down the esophagus, through the fistula, and back up the trachea may be helpful in localization.

References:

1. Alkan M, Büyükyavuz I, Dogru D et al: Tracheoesophageal fistula due to disc-battery ingestion. Eur J Pediatr Surg 2004; 14: 274-278.

2. Anand TS, Kumar S, Wadhwa V et al: Rare case of spontaneous closure of tracheo-esophageal fistula secondary to disc battery ingestion. Int. J. Pediatr. Otorhinolaryngol 2002; 63: 57-59.

3. Grisel JJ, Richter GT, Casper KA et al: Acquired tracheoesophageal fistula following disc-battery ingestion: can we watch and wait? Int. J. Pediatr. Otorhinolaryngol 2008; 72: 699-706.

4. Imamoglu M, Cay A, Kosucu P et al: Acquired tracheo-esophageal fistulas caused by button battery lodged in the esophagus. Pediatr. Surg. Int 2004; 20: 292-294.

5. Litovitz T and Schmitz BF: Ingestion of cylindrical and button batteries: an analysis of 2382 cases. Pediatrics 1992; 89: 747-757.

6. Litovitz T, Whitaker N and Clark L: Preventing battery ingestions: an analysis of 8648 cases. Pediatrics 2010; 125: 1178-1183.

7. Okuyama H, Kubota A, Oue T et al: Primary repair of tracheoesophageal fistula secondary to disc battery ingestion: a case report. J. Pediatr. Surg 2004; 39: 243-244.

8. Senthilkumaran G, Crankson S and Yousef M: Spontaneous closure of acquired tracheo-oesophageal fistula. J Laryngol Otol 1996; 110: 685-687.

9. Van Asperen PP, Seeto I and Cass DT: Acquired tracheo-oesophageal fistula after ingestion of a mercury button-battery. Med. J. Aust 1986; 145: 412-415.

10. Yardeni D, Yardeni H, Coran AG et al: Severe esophageal damage due to button battery ingestion: can it be prevented? Pediatr. Surg. Int 2004; 20: 496-501.


Advice

I get asked about Pediatric Surgery fairly frequently by High
school/College/Medical Students/Surgery Residents. For what its worth,
here is some general info and advice:

The way it works is this:

1. You try to do well in high school and get good grades and test scores. Your general approach is “never burn any bridges” – ie, don’t get arrested/pregnant/quit school/flunk out/etc. In other words, don’t do things that limit your life choices, whatever they are (and they will change about a million times).

2. Get into a “good” college. Any state supported school qualifies – University of Michigan, UT, U of any state. You will get a good education (if you try to) at any school of that caliber or above. You probably won’t get a better education at Harvard or Oxford – you will, however, meet people and have opportunities at Oxford and Harvard you won’t get at Univer of Wisconsin, but in the grand scheme of things, going to University of Wisconsin will not hold you back in any way. Don’t get too caught up in spending zillions to go to an impressive school (one your parents like to brag to their friends about); but if you want to go there, fine.

3. Get good grades in college – high school doesn’t matter for %$*; college does. For med school you have to take 2 years of chemistry (4 courses on the typical semester plan), 1 year of biology, 1 year of physics. Enjoy college – its the best time of your life by a hundred miles

4. ALWAYS take the honors classes – they are easier (smaller class size, taught by professors instead of TA (teaching assistant who often find English difficult), instructors figure you must be smart – for God’s sake, you’re in the honors class – and if you don’t do well, they give you a B). Also, it looks good on the transcript.

5. Take a review course for the MCAT (med school admit test) -try to do well

6. Any US medical school is OK – same arguement as college

7. Again, do well in medical school if possible. In high school, there are a lot of morons. In college, there are less morons, but still quite a few. In medical school, almost nobody is stupid, and there will be people a LOT smarter than you. My friend (who sold his 3rd company for $ 265 million) from med school said to me, quite
innocently, during a pharmacology lecture – “Why do you take notes in these classes – I just memorize it all”. If you do really well in medical school, you can get into a good surgical residency. A good residency (at major university) is important.

8. For pediatric surgery, it is important to get into a good surgery residency – residencies are 5 years, but EVERYONE who matches in pediatric surgery has:

- done 2 additional years of research
- has an average of 6 -10 publications
- has done well on the annual ABSITE (a test given to all surgery residents annually)
- has letters of recommendation that say things like “best resident I’ve had in 15 years”

9. Our hospital has one of the more highly regarded training programs for pediatric surgeons. We get about 80 applications a year – nationally, there are about 20-30 training positions (fellowships). They take 2 years to complete. All of the applicants are top notch – people don’t bother to apply if they realize they won’t match. I interview about 40 applicants per year – we pick 1.

10. Persistence is the hallmark of success. A reasonably intelligent person can do about any career – if they are persistent. You can do it.

Overall, worrying/thinking about a medical subspecialty at the high school level is OK, but it is much more important to “take a day at a time” – do well in high school. Then do well in college, etc etc. A kid who is really good in high school baseball would be better off with “winning the state championship” as his/her focus and goal,
rather than “I’m going to play shortstop for the New York Yankees”

None of this is meant to be discouraging – see # 10 above. If I managed to do it, pretty much anybody can.