Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Central Nervous System (CNS) embryonal tumors with PLAG-family amplification have been isolated by a distinct DNA-methylation profile [1]. These tumors are characterized by recurrent PLAGL1 or PLAGL2 amplifications [1, 4]. In some cases, no amplification of these genes was found (9.7%, 3/31) [1]. Here, we report two cases, classified as being part of the “embryonal tumor with PLAG-family amplification” methylation class (MC), that did not have a PLAG-family amplification but instead harbored a PLAG1 fusion. The aim of our work was to compare the clinical, radiological and histopathological features of these cases with previously published cases having a PLAGL1/2 amplification.
The two observations concerned a 6-year-old boy (Case #1) and a 39-year-old woman (Case #2). The tumors were located in the left occipital lobe (Case #1) (Fig. 1a–d) and in the fourth ventricle with another location in the left temporal lobe and a leptomeningeal dissemination (Case #2) (Fig. 1e–h). Neuroradiological review revealed large tissular and cystic tumors, having strong enhancement after contrast injection (Fig. 1). Histopathological review revealed that both cases presented similar features (Fig. 2). They were well circumscribed from the brain/cerebellar parenchyma and composed of sheets of monotonous oval cells with round to oval nuclei and a pale cytoplasm (Fig. 2a and g). In some areas, an epithelioid pattern with sharply demarcated tumor cells was present. A dense branching capillary network (with microvascular proliferation in case #2) was observed. No rosettes, rhabdoid component or pseudorosettes were discovered. Hemorrhagic and microcystic modifications were present. Necrosis was absent, but the mitotic count and proliferation index were high (Fig. 2f and l). Immunohistochemistry detected a preserved expression of INI1, BRG1 in the tumor cells but there was no immunopositivity for LIN28A or BCOR. Neuronal markers (MAP2 and synaptophysin) were constantly expressed (Fig. 2b, c and h, i), whereas there was no or only focal expression of glial markers (Fig. 2d, e and j). Desmin was expressed in case #2 (without expression of smooth muscle actin or myogenin) (Fig. 2k). All of these results resembled the reported CNS embryonal tumors with PLAG-family amplification [1, 4]. Using the Heidelberg DNA-methylation classifier (v12.5), case #1 was classified as a CNS embryonal tumor with PLAG-family amplification (having a calibrated max-score of 0.99), whereas the second case did not present a significant calibrated score for a MC (despite good DNA integrity/quantity and performance of bisulfide conversion). They both clustered in vicinity of this MC by t-Distributed Stochastic Neighbor Embedding (t-SNE) analysis (Supplementary Fig. 1). RNA sequencing analysis of the two cases showed a fusion between PLAG1 and TCF4 (case #1) and EWSR1 (case #2) genes (Supplementary Fig. 2). For Case #1, a gross total resection of the tumor was performed followed by craniospinal radiation therapy. A posterior fossa metastasis was discovered 8 months later and was treated by gross total resection, chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Histopathologically, the second lesion was similar to the primary tumor. The patient was alive without novel progression at the end of follow-up, 65 months after the initial disease. For Case #2, a gross total resection of the posterior fossa tumor was performed, followed by craniospinal radiation therapy. At the latest follow-up, 16 months after the first surgery, the patient was alive without recurrence in the posterior fossa and with a stable disease in the supratentorial area.
The novel embryonal tumor with amplification of the PLAGL1/2 genes mainly concerns children (85% of reported cases, ranging from 0 to 36 years old) and may be located all along the neuraxis (mostly hemispheric but also infratentorial and ventricular) [1, 4]. The sex ratio female: male is 1.4 [1, 4]. Radiologically, few data are available. These tumors seem to be well-circumscribed, voluminous tissular and cystic masses that show strong enhancement after injection of gadolinium [4]. Histopathologically, they are considered embryonal tumors and present a pluriphenotypic immunoprofile (with an expression of neuronal markers, focal expression of glial markers, and a frequent staining for desmin but without any immunoreactivity for the other myogenic markers) [1, 4]. Because of their poorly differentiated morphology, initial diagnoses were variable: glioneuronal tumors, sarcomas, medulloblastomas or high-grade gliomas, according to the tumor location [1, 4]. The two current cases were in line with all these clinical, radiological and histopathological features. However, contrarily to the first description, they did not harbor PLAGL1/2 amplifications but rather a fusion implicating the PLAG1 gene. To date, in the CNS, PLAG-family gene alterations have been implicated in two different tumor types. PLAGL1/2 amplifications have been reported in a subgroup of embryonal tumors, whereas PLAGL1 fusions have been described in ependymoma-like neuroepithelial tumor (NET) [1, 3]. Fusions of PLAG1, a gene of the PLAG-family, have not been reported in the CNS. They have been reported in several tumors, such as salivary gland pleomorphic adenoma, lipoblastoma, and myoepithelial carcinoma [2]. To our knowledge, no fusions implicating the TCF4 and EWSR1 genes have been reported in these tumors. Cases of ependymoma-like NET with PLAGL1 fusions [3] were distinct from ours in terms of location (all NET were supratentorial), histopathology (NET present frequent ependymal features) and immunohistochemistry (constant expression of GFAP in NET) [3]. Using t-SNE analysis, our cases clustered in close vicinity with the MC of embryonal tumors with PLAGL1/2 amplifications. Three cases out of 31 (9.7%) of DNA-methylation based embryonal tumors with PLAGL1/2 did not harbor any amplifications of these genes, and to our knowledge, PLAG1 fusions were not explored [1]. Data concerning the outcome of patients with embryonal tumors with PLAG-family amplifications, seems to evidence a high rate of recurrences and a poorer prognosis in cases with PLAGL2 amplifications [1, 4]. More reports are necessary to determine any potential benefit of chemotherapy and craniospinal irradiation in the treatment of these rare tumors.
To conclude, we report, for the first time, two embryonal tumors with PLAG1 fusions sharing clinico-radiological, histopathological, immunohistochemical, and epigenetic similarities to CNS embryonal tumors with PLAG-family amplification. Consequently, PLAG1 fusions expand the spectrum of the alterations encountered in CNS tumors. Consequently, we recommend searching for alternative alterations of the PLAG1 gene in the event of a radiological and histopathological suspicion of this diagnosis when PLAGL1/2 amplifications have not been found.
References
Keck M-K, Sill M, Wittmann A, Joshi P, Stichel D, Beck P et al (2023) Amplification of the PLAG-family genes-PLAGL1 and PLAGL2-is a key feature of the novel tumor type CNS embryonal tumor with PLAGL amplification. Acta Neuropathol (Berl) 145:49–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-022-02516-2
Rupp NJ, Höller S, Brada M, Vital D, Morand GB, Broglie MA et al (2022) Expanding the clinicopathological spectrum of TGFBR3-PLAG1 rearranged salivary gland neoplasms with myoepithelial differentiation including evidence of high-grade transformation. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 61:94–104. https://doi.org/10.1002/gcc.23009
Sievers P, Henneken SC, Blume C, Sill M, Schrimpf D, Stichel D et al (2021) Recurrent fusions in PLAGL1 define a distinct subset of pediatric-type supratentorial neuroepithelial tumors. Acta Neuropathol (Berl) 142:827–839. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-021-02356-6
Tauziède-Espariat A, Beccaria K, Dangouloff-Ros V, Sievers P, Meurgey A, Pissaloux D et al (2023) A comprehensive analysis of infantile central nervous system tumors to improve distinctive criteria for infant-type hemispheric glioma versus desmoplastic infantile ganglioglioma/astrocytoma. Brain Pathol Zurich Switz. https://doi.org/10.1111/bpa.13182
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the laboratory technicians at the GHU Paris Neuro Sainte-Anne for their assistance and the association “111 des arts”. The RENOCLIP-LOC is the clinico-pathological network instrumental in the central histopathological review supported by the Institut National du Cancer (INCa).
Funding
The authors declare that they have not received any funding.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Consortia
Contributions
AT-E, DD, AL, VL, JM, OK, VD-R, and NB: compiled the MR-I and clinical records; ATE, PR, GG, AM, FC and PV conducted the neuropathological examinations; AT-E, AS, EU-C, YN, PS and FS: conducted the molecular studies; AT-E, LH and PV: drafted the manuscript; all authors reviewed the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest directly related to the topic of this article.
Ethical approval
This study was approved by the GHU Paris Psychiatrie Neurosciences, Sainte-Anne Hospital’s local ethic committee.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
401_2023_2643_MOESM1_ESM.tiff
Supplementary file1: Fig. 1 Methylation-based t-SNE distribution. Reference DNA methylation classes (v12.5 of the DKFZ classifier): EFT_CIC: CIC-rearranged sarcoma; EPN_MPE: myxopapillary ependymoma; EPN_PFA: ependymoma, posterior fossa groupA; EPN_PFB: ependymoma, posterior fossa group B; EPN_ZFTA: ependymoma, ZFTA fusion; EPN_YAP: ependymoma, YAP fusion; HGNET_BCOR: central nervous system tumor with BCOR internal tandem duplication; HGNET_MN1: astroblastoma, MN1-altered; HGNET_PATZ: neuroepithelial tumor with PATZ1 fusion; HGNET_PLAG: embryonal tumor with PLAG-family amplification; NET_PLAGL1: neuroepithelial tumor with PLAGL1-fusion. (TIFF 235 KB)
401_2023_2643_MOESM2_ESM.tif
Supplementary file2: Fig. 2 Schematic representation of PLAG1 fusions. The EWSR1 and TCF4 genes contribute no significant functional domain. The putative PLAG1 fusion proteins will contain 5 functional zinc finger domains out of the 7 in the wild-type protein. (TIF 65 KB)
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Tauziède-Espariat, A., Siegfried, A., Nicaise, Y. et al. PLAG1 fusions extend the spectrum of PLAG(L)-altered CNS tumors. Acta Neuropathol 146, 841–844 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-023-02643-4
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-023-02643-4