The pathology of malignant fibrous histiocytoma of bone

Huvos, Andrew G.; Heilweil, Martin; Bretsky, Sara S.

doi:10.1097/00000478-198512000-00002

Cited by 142 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These features made it difficult to diagnose this tumor as a fibrosarcoma, since it resembled a round cell sarcoma or a malignant angiomatoid fibrous histiocytoma. 27 In the case of melanoma, tumors growing in the flank (Fig. 3C) showed large and numerous necrotic areas with leukocytic infiltration.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Alternative site of implantation affects tumor malignancy and metastatic potential in mice: Its comparison to the flank model

Speroni

Bustuoabad²,

Gasparri³

et al. 2009

Cancer Biology & Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

MC-C fibrosarcoma and B16F0 melanoma tumors were implanted intradermally in the dorsal region of the foot of mice. Tumor progression was compared to standard implantation in the flank. Although foot tumors only reached 13% (MC-C) and 25% (B16F0) of the mean volume of flank tumors, a more malignant phenotype in terms of histology and survival rate was observed in this type of tumors. Moreover, lung metastases were only detected in hosts bearing foot tumors, in contrast to MC-C and B16F0 populations with tumors growing in the flank. In addition, cellular influx and local immune reaction were higher in the dorsal region of the foot. According to our results, the dermis of the flank allows excessive tumor growth due to its low reactivity. Thus, differences in innate and adaptive immune effectors between the evaluated tumor microenvironments would account for the differences in tumor malignancy. Due to its striking differences with the standard flank inoculation, the tumor implantation model herein introduced could be a valuable tool to study the metastatic potential of different cell lines and the microenvironment components affecting tumor growth.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Alternative site of implantation affects tumor malignancy and metastatic potential in mice: Its comparison to the flank model

Speroni

Bustuoabad²,

Gasparri³

et al. 2009

Cancer Biology & Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[4][5][6] In addition to soft tissue, the tumor has been reported to occur in virtually every part of the body, including bone, viscera, and skin. 2,7 Despite this ubiquity, however, MFH remains relatively uncommon in the head and neck region, accounting for 3%-10% of all cases. 8,9 To our knowledge, except in a limited number of case reports, [10][11][12][13] most of the previous reports on MFH of the head and neck focused on the clinicopathologic features, 8,9,[14][15][16] and the imaging features were not the major concern.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Malignant Fibrous Histiocytoma of the Head and Neck: CT and MR Imaging Findings

Park¹,

Kim²,

Lee³

et al. 2008

AJNR Am J Neuroradiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Clinical stage, histological grade of malignancy, and local recurrences were the most important prognostic factors for MFH in the bone. Huvos et al [Huvos AG et al, 1985]. suggested that metastatic spread in patients with MFH primarily in the bone was not to the regional lymph nodes, but rather a hematogenous dissemination predominantly to the lungs.…”

Section: Malignant Fibrous Histiocytoma Of Head and Neckmentioning

confidence: 99%