Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Feline injection-site sarcoma tumor markers and prognosis
By Porcellato, I et al.·Published in Veterinary pathology·2017·1 Department of Veterinary Medicine, Italy·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Feline Injection-Site Sarcoma.
- Species:
- cat
Plain-English summary
A cat with a tumor at an injection site was studied to understand how aggressive it might be and how likely it was to come back after surgery. Researchers looked at various factors, including the size of the tumor and how many cells were dividing, to see if they could predict recurrence. They found that larger tumors (over 3.75 cm) and a higher number of dividing cells (more than 20 per 10 high-power fields) were linked to a greater chance of the tumor returning. Unfortunately, other tests didn't help in predicting outcomes.
People also search for: cat injection site tumor · feline injection-site sarcoma prognosis · cat tumor size and recurrence · how to treat cat injection site sarcoma
Abstract
Feline injection-site sarcoma (FISS) is an aggressive tumor believed to arise from the proliferation of fibroblasts and myofibroblasts in areas of chronic inflammation, particularly at sites of injection. Local recurrence is frequent after surgical excision. Gelatinases (MMP-2 and MMP-9) and their inhibitor (TIMP-2) are endopeptidases pivotal in extracellular matrix remodeling and therefore in tumor invasiveness. The aim of this study was to investigate the immunohistochemical expression of MMP-2, MMP-9, and TIMP-2 in FISS to assess their usefulness as prognostic factors. Size, soft tissue sarcoma (STS) grading system, depth of infiltration, surgical margins, and Ki-67 index were evaluated as additional prognostic markers. Twenty-four cases of primary FISS were classified according to clinical follow-up as nonrecurrent (NR, n = 14; 58.3%) and recurrent (R, n = 10; 41.7%). MMP-2, MMP-9, and TIMP-2 were variably expressed in the FISS examined, confirming their role in tumor invasiveness, yet they did not show significant differences between the R and NR groups. These results could be due to different tumor stages or to the multiple activities of these enzymes, not limited to ECM remodeling. The immunohistochemical expression of these enzymes considered alone does not seem to be useful as a prognostic marker. STS grading system, depth of infiltration, surgical margins, and Ki-67 index did not relate to recurrence. Instead, the size of the tumor, measured after formalin fixation, with an optimal cutoff of 3.75 cm (accuracy = 86%; P < .05), and the mitotic count, with an optimal cutoff of 20 mitoses/10 HPF (accuracy = 80%; P < .05), could be evaluated as useful prognostic markers.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28005492/