Clinicopathologic Features of a Series of Primary Renal CIC-rearranged Sarcomas With Comprehensive Molecular Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CIC-rearranged sarcomas rarely occur in visceral organs including the kidney. The most common fusion partner with CIC is the DUX4 gene, but variant fusion partners have also been reported. Herein, we describe the clinicopathologic features and comprehensive molecular profiling of 4 cases of primary renal CIC-rearranged sarcomas. All cases occurred in females, age range 13 to 82 years and included 3 resections and 1 needle biopsy specimen. There was a tendency for development of metastatic disease predominantly to the lungs and poor disease outcome despite different treatment strategies. Histologically, variable round cell (20% to 100%), spindle cell (0% to 80%), and rhabdoid morphologies (0% to 20%) were seen. By immunohistochemistry diffuse WT1 nuclear (2 to 3+, ∼90%) labeling was present in 1 case, with cytoplasmic staining in the others (3+, 40% to 75%). CD99 was focally positive in all 4 cases (≤10%); 1 case each was diffusely positive for c-myc (2 to 3+, ∼90%) and ETV4 (3+, ∼90%); 1 case was focally positive for c-myc (2+, ∼5%) and calretinin (2+, ∼5%); and all cases were negative for cytokeratin and NKX2.2. CIC rearrangement by fluorescence in situ hybridization was present in the 3 cases tested. Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) of 3 cases revealed a CIC-DUX4 fusion in 2 cases, and 1 CIC-NUTM1 fusion. All 4 CIC-rearranged renal sarcomas had low mutation burden, and except HLA-A and MLL mutations lacked genomic alterations in other oncogenic drivers. Material from the needle biopsy was insufficient for CGP but that case was positive with the DUX4 immunohistochemical stain as were the 2 CIC-DUX4 tumors. In conclusion, CIC-rearranged sarcomas rarely occur in the kidney with a tendency for poor outcome and in this series we illustrate an example with CIC-NUTM1 fusion, an emerging variant, at a visceral site. Testing by fluorescence in situ hybridization or CGP is optimal to avoid missing cases that harbor variant fusion partners.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".