Rare Dual Lesion: Extraskeletal Osteosarcoma Developing Within a Simple Lipoma

Discussion

Extraosseous osteosarcoma, typically a high-grade malignant neoplasm of the soft tissues that produces osteoid or cartilaginous matrix, is histologically indistinguishable from osteosarcoma of bone.

Conventional lipoma, the most common subtype of lipoma, is a benign mesenchymal tumor. Other subtypes are hibernoma, fibrolipoma, angiolipoma, myelolipoma, spindle-cell lipoma, pleomorphic lipoma, and atypical lipomatous tumor.⁷ Atypical lipomatous tumor and well-differentiated liposarcoma are distinguished from each other by location: The World Health Organization recommends the term atypical lipomatous tumor for tumors that arise in the extremities and trunk lesions and well-differentiated liposarcoma for neoplasms that develop in the retroperitoneum, peritoneum, mediastinum, spermatic cord, and thoracic cavity.⁸ On PET, hypermetabolic activity is nonspecific and can be seen in malignant tumors and some benign reactive processes, such as evolving heterotopic ossification. However, simple lipomas, including those with mature ossification or dystrophic calcification, do not manifest increased FDG avidity.⁹

We are not aware of any published cases of extraosseous osteosarcoma arising within a conventional lipoma. A limited number of cases of coexisting conventional lipoma and spindle-cell lipoma or liposarcoma have been reported.^10-13 Retroperitoneal liposarcoma with areas of dedifferentiation into osteosarcoma has also been described.¹⁴ Development of malignant fibrous histiocytoma and liposarcoma have also been reported within intraosseous lipomas.¹⁵ One theory is based on premalignancy as a biological concept as opposed to a morphologic one. In other words, lesions that may be considered morphologically benign may already have the biological phenotype for malignancy that is not yet reflected morphologically.¹⁶ However, it has been suggested that such findings may instead result from initial sampling error or histologic misdiagnosis.^17,18There is a spectrum of findings on imaging studies of extraosseous osteosarcoma. Plain radiographs show a soft-tissue density with variable degrees of central calcification that reflects mineralization of deposited neoplastic bone. The pattern of calcification is characteristically amorphous or cloudlike, as opposed to the ring-and-arc observed in cartilage matrix. On CT, the soft-tissue mass of extraosseous osteosarcoma is separate from the underlying bone and periosteum—a defining characteristic that distinguishes it from conventional intramedullary and juxtacortical osteosarcoma.⁶ The central pattern of amorphous calcification helps to differentiate extraosseous osteosarcoma from heterotopic ossification, which characteristically demonstrates zonation, with trabecular architecture and mature cortical bone peripherally.¹ Enhancement of extraskeletal osteosarcoma tends to be heterogeneous and depends on the quantity of necrosis. Extraskeletal osteosarcoma tends to be isointense on T1-weighted MRI and mildly hyperintense on T2-weighted MRI.^1,6 Areas of very low signal intensity on both T1- and T2-weighted MRI may reflect mineralization.¹⁹ If intratumoral hemorrhage has occurred, there may be signal intensity of blood products of various ages.^1,3 Tumors with abundant hemorrhage can be mistaken for hematoma. FDG-PET radiotracer accumulation tends to be intense peripherally with variable central activity depending on quantity of necrosis and hemorrhage.¹The radiologic differential diagnosis includes myositis ossificans, chondrosseous lipoma, parosteal lipoma (ossifying variant), liposarcoma with metaplastic bone, dedifferentiated liposarcoma with osteosarcoma or chondrosarcoma component, and malignant mesenchymoma. Other common soft-tissue sarcomas, such as fibrosarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, and pleomorphic undifferentiated sarcoma, are excluded by the presence of fat within the tumor. The radiographic pattern of osteoid matrix produced by the tumor in our patient may be seen in heterotopic ossification, but the absence of mature ossification with zonation was evidence against heterotopic ossification, and microscopically it was neoplastic rather than reactive osteoid. In addition, it is possible that, because of the small size of the soft-tissue component, it was difficult to appreciate the less mature osteoid matrix peripherally. The lack of characteristic rings and arcs helps exclude benign and malignant cartilage containing neoplasms. Malignant mesenchymoma is a diagnosis of exclusion, and such tumors are usually better classified as sarcomas that have undergone heterologous differentiation.

The histologic diagnosis of extraosseous osteosarcoma requires identification of malignant mesenchymal cells that secrete neoplastic osteoid that may or may not mineralize. It is important to exclude the possibility that the malignant bone-forming tumor is part of a different type of sarcoma, the most common being dedifferentiated liposarcoma. Immunohistochemistry can be helpful in this situation, as dedifferentiated liposarcomas demonstrate nuclear expression of MDM2, CDK4, and p16, a constellation of findings rare in conventional and extraosseous osteosarcoma.^20-23 Osteosarcoma has not previously been reported as arising in a lipoma; in our patient’s case, we excluded the possibility that the fatty component represented an underlying atypical lipomatous tumor/well-differentiated or dedifferentiated liposarcoma on the basis of morphology and lack of expression of MDM2, CDK4, and p16.

Although histologically identical to osteosarcoma of bone, extraosseous osteosarcoma is treated differently because of its relatively decreased chemosensitivity and radiosensitivity. Treatment tends to be focused on limb-sparing wide local excision, and local recurrence complicates about 50% of cases.¹ Neoadjuvant or adjuvant treatment with radiation or chemotherapy is often provided.⁶ Platinum and doxorubicin chemotherapeutic agents, which are first-line treatments for osteosarcoma of bone, tend to be less effective in extraosseous osteosarcoma, and ifosfamide is more often used instead.⁵

Primary extraosseous osteosarcoma classically has a poor prognosis, with 2- to 3-year mortality of 50%, and prognosis tends to be worse for secondary radiation-induced sarcomas than for primary sarcomas.^2,6 However, with there being improved treatment protocols involving surgery and chemoradiation, more recent 5-year survival rates without metastatic disease are between 60% and 80%, though there is no definite consensus regarding the optimal systemic therapy regimen.^1,24 In a 2014 review of 53 patients who presented with localized disease, Choi and colleagues²⁵ identified a 3-year cumulative 39% incidence of death caused by disease, and in 2016 Sio and colleagues²⁶ reported that 55% of patients, most of whom had stage 3 disease, were alive at median follow-up of 45 months. Similar to osteosarcoma of bone, metastases may develop up to 10 years after primary treatment and are most commonly to the lung (80%-88%). Because extraosseous osteosarcoma is rare, no definite prognostic factors have been determined, but metastases at presentation and large tumor size (>5 cm) likely portend a worse prognosis.^2,3,27 Fibroblastic and chondroblastic subtypes may have a slightly better prognosis.^6,28

Conclusion

Extraosseous osteosarcoma is a rare malignancy that should be considered in the appropriate clinical and imaging scenario. This article is the first report of a case of a radiation-associated extraosseous osteosarcoma that developed within a lipoma with preoperative and postoperative multimodality imaging.

Am J Orthop. 2017;46(3):E200-E206. Copyright Frontline Medical Communications Inc. 2017. All rights reserved.