Hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell carcinoma (HLRCC) syndrome secondary to germline fumarate hydratase (FH) mutation presents with cutaneous and uterine leiomyomas, and a distinctive aggressive renal carcinoma. Identification of HLRCC patients presenting first with uterine leiomyomas may allow early intervention for renal carcinoma. We reviewed the morphology and immunohistochemical (IHC) findings in patients with uterine leiomyomas and confirmed or presumed HLRCC. IHC was also performed on a tissue microarray of unselected uterine leiomyomas and leiomyosarcomas. FH-deficient leiomyomas underwent Sanger and massively parallel sequencing on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue. All 5 patients with HLRCC had at least 1 FH-deficient leiomyoma: defined as completely negative FH staining with positive internal controls. One percent (12/1152) of unselected uterine leiomyomas but 0 of 88 leiomyosarcomas were FH deficient. FH-deficient leiomyoma patients were younger (42.7 vs. 48.8 y, P=0.024) and commonly demonstrated a distinctive hemangiopericytomatous vasculature. Other features reported to be associated with FH-deficient leiomyomas (hypercellularity, nuclear atypia, inclusion-like nucleoli, stromal edema) were inconstantly present. Somatic FH mutations were identified in 6 of 10 informative unselected FH-deficient leiomyomas. None of these mutations were found in the germline. We conclude that, while the great majority of patients with HLRCC will have FH-deficient leiomyomas, 1% of all uterine leiomyomas are FH deficient usually due to somatic inactivation. Although IHC screening for FH may have a role in confirming patients at high risk for hereditary disease before genetic testing, prospective identification of FH-deficient leiomyomas is of limited clinical benefit in screening unselected patients because of the relatively high incidence of somatic mutations.

No abstract

Inflammatory myofibroblastic tumor (IMT) of the female genital tract is under-recognized. We investigated the prevalence of ALK-positive IMT in lesions previously diagnosed as gynecologic smooth muscle tumors. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) for ALK was performed on tissue microarrays of unselected tumors resected from 2009 to 2013. Three of 1176 (0.26%) “leiomyomas” and 1 of 44 (2.3%) “leiomyosarcomas” were ALK IHC positive, confirmed translocated by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and therefore more appropriately classified as IMT. On review significant areas of all 4 tumors closely mimicked smooth muscle tumors morphologically, but all showed at least subtle/focal features suggesting IMT. Recognizing that the distinction between IMT and leiomyoma/leiomyosarcoma can be subtle, we then reviewed 1 hematoxylin and eosin slide from each patient undergoing surgery for “leiomyoma” from 2014 to 2017 and selected cases for ALK IHC with a low threshold. Of these, 30 of 571 (5.3%) underwent IHC. Two were confirmed to be IHC positive and FISH rearranged. Of the 6 IMTs, only 1 tumor with a previous diagnosis of leiomyosarcoma, an infiltrative margin and equivocal necrosis, metastasized. Of note it demonstrated a less aggressive clinical course compared with most metastatic leiomyosarcomas (alive with disease at 6 y). The patient was subsequently offered crizotinib to which she responded rapidly. In conclusion, IMTs may closely mimic gynecologic smooth muscle tumors. IMTs account for at least 5 of 1747 (0.3%) tumors previously diagnosed as leiomyoma and 1 of 44 (2.3%) as leiomyosarcoma. These tumors may be recognized prospectively with awareness of subtle/focal histologic clues, coupled with a low threshold for ALK IHC.