OMICS PUBLISHING GROUP/ClinicalMeningioma with remarkable multiple rosette formation: A diagnostically difficult case--Manuscript Draft-Manuscript Number:

CLINICALGROUP-18-812R1

Full Title:

Meningioma with remarkable multiple rosette formation: A diagnostically difficult case

Short Title:

Rosette forming meningioma

Article Type:

Case Report

Section/Category:

Journal of Medical & Surgical Pathology

Keywords:

meningioma; rosette formation; atypical meningioma; pseudopapillary

Corresponding Author:

Kenichi MizutaniJAPAN

Corresponding Author Secondary
Information:
Corresponding Author's Institution:
Corresponding Author's SecondaryInstitution:
First Author:

Kenichi Mizutani, M.D.

First Author Secondary Information:
Order of Authors:

Kenichi Mizutani, M.D.
Satoko Nakada, M.D.
Akira Tamase, M.D., Ph.D.
Osamu Tachibana, M.D., Ph.D.
Hideaki Iizuka, M.D., Ph.D.
Takanori Hirose, M.D., Ph.D.
Sohsuke Yamada, M.D., Ph.D.

Order of Authors Secondary Information:
Manuscript Region of Origin:

JAPANAbstract:

Background: Rosette formation is a rare morphological feature in meningiomas. It canbe seen in angiomatous, meningothelial, transitional, secretory, papillary or rhabdoid
subtype; however there are very few reports of meningiomas with rosettes, and thefeature itself is not criterion for the WHO grade, so this feature sometimes makes thediagnosis difficult.
Case presentation: A 62-year-old Japanese woman stumbled and was admitted to ahospital. Magnetic resonance imaging showed a 50 mm extra-axial tumor on the rightcerebral falx. Histologically, the tumor contained multiple rosettes that had a central
nuclear-free zone without a vessel core. It also showed a sheet-like or whorled growth
pattern and pseudopapillary structure. Some round tumor cells had abundantly dense
eosinophilic cytoplasm, displaying rhabdoid features. High cellularity, small cells with ahigh nuclear-to-cytoplasmic ratio and prominent nucleoli were recognized, but themitotic activity was less than 1/10 high-power fields. The tumor was
immunohistochemically positive for EMA and synaptophysin (weakly) but negative for
GFAP, Progesterone, STAT6, S-100, NeuN and melan A. The Ki-67 labeling index wasmerely 0.5 %. Although ependymoma was considered as the first differential diagnosis,
it was ruled out, as perivascular pseudorosettes and ependymal rosettes were notseen. We ultimately made a diagnosis of atypical meningioma with a rosette-like andpseudopapillary pattern, WHO grade Ⅱ.
Discussion and Conclusion: The meningiomas in this case showed remarkable rosetteformation, but as this is not criterion for deciding WHO grade, grading wasPowered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation

diagnostically difficult. Papillary meningioma was also considered as a criticaldifferential diagnosis; however, our final diagnosis was made after considering the very
low mitotic activity and Ki-67 labeling index, which were not consistent with WHO grade
Ⅲ. This case was very unique and diagnostically difficult. This report may be an aid forthe diagnosis of pathologically unusual entity.
Suggested Reviewers:
Opposed Reviewers:
Response to Reviewers:

Response to the Editors and Reviewers
First, we would like to express our thanks to the editors and reviewers for theircomments. According to the comments of the editors and reviewers, we have revised
our Case report (Meningioma with remarkable multiple rosette formation: Adiagnostically difficult case).
Our point-by-point responses to the comments are shown below.

Response to Reviewer #1
1.Page 4: Please change the sentence from "A study reported papillary meningioma
recurred in up to 59 %" to "A study reported recurrence rate of papillary meningioma up
to 59%"
Ans:
In accordance with the reviewer's comments, we made the following changes: "A study
reported recurrence rate of papillary meningioma up to 59%"(page 4).
2.Page 5, first paragraph: Please remove the word "and" in the following sentence"The tumor connected to the deeper edge of the cerebral flax and was surgicallyremoved"Ans:
In accordance with the reviewer's comments, we made the following changes: " Thetumor connected to the deeper edge of the cerebral falx was surgically removed"(page5).
3.Page 5, second paragraph: Please place a "," after Histologically and correct theword "multiple" in the following sentence "Histologically the tumor contained multiple
rosettes". The corrected sentence should read as "Histologically, the tumor contained
multiple rosettes."
Ans:
In accordance with the reviewer's comments, we made the following changes:"Histologically, the tumor contained multiple rosettes"(page 5).
4.Page 6Under Discussion and Conclusion: Rewrite the following sentence "This is avery unique characteristic." The corrected sentence should read as "This is a very
unique characteristic feature".
Ans:
In accordance with the reviewer's comments, we made the following changes: "This isa very unique characteristic feature"(page 6).
5.In the list of abbreviations add the following: WHO, EMA, GFAP, STAT6.
Ans:
In accordance with the reviewer's comments, we made the following changes: "CT,computed tomography; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; WHO, world healthorganization; EMA, epithelial membrane antigen; GFAP, glial fibrillary acidic protein;
STAT6, signal transducer and activator of transcription 6."(page 9).

Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation

Cover Letter

Dear Editor

According to the comments of the editors and reviewers, we have revised our Case report,
entitled "Meningioma with remarkable multiple rosette formation: A diagnostically difficult case". We
hope that you will consider the present manuscript for publication.
We look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.

Respectfully yours,

Kenichi Mizutani, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Kanazawa Medical University,
1-1 Daigaku, Uchinada, Kahoku, Ishikawa 920-0293, Japan. Tel: 81-76-286-2211; Fax: 81-76-2862339; and E-mail: mizutani@kanazawa-med.ac.jp

Response to Reviewer comments

Response to the Editors and Reviewers

First, we would like to express our thanks to the editors and reviewers for their comments.
According to the comments of the editors and reviewers, we have revised our Case report(Meningioma with remarkable multiple rosette formation: A diagnostically difficult case).

Our point-by-point responses to the comments are shown below.

Response to Reviewer #1

1.

Page 4: Please change the sentence from "A study reported papillary meningioma recurredin up to 59 %" to "A study reported recurrence rate of papillary meningioma up to 59%"

Ans:
In accordance with the reviewer's comments, we made the following changes: "A study
reported recurrence rate of papillary meningioma up to 59%"(page 4).

2.

Page 5, first paragraph: Please remove the word "and" in the following sentence "Thetumor connected to the deeper edge of the cerebral flax and was surgically removed"

Ans:In accordance with the reviewer's comments, we made the following changes: " The tumor
connected to the deeper edge of the cerebral falx was surgically removed"(page 5).

3.

Page 5, second paragraph: Please place a "," after Histologically and correct the word

"multiple" in the following sentence "Histologically the tumor contained multiple rosettes". The
corrected sentence should read as "Histologically, the tumor contained multiple rosettes."

Ans:
In accordance with the reviewer's comments, we made the following changes: "Histologically,
the tumor contained multiple rosettes"(page 5).

4.

Page 6

Under Discussion and Conclusion: Rewrite the following sentence "This is avery unique characteristic." The corrected sentence should read as "This is a very uniquecharacteristic feature".

Ans:
In accordance with the reviewer's comments, we made the following changes: "This is a very
unique characteristic feature"(page 6).

5.

In the list of abbreviations add the following: WHO, EMA, GFAP, STAT6.

Ans:
In accordance with the reviewer's comments, we made the following changes: "CT, computed
tomography; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; WHO, world health organization; EMA, epithelial
membrane antigen; GFAP, glial fibrillary acidic protein; STAT6, signal transducer and activator oftranscription 6."(page 9).

Manuscript

Click here toaccess/download;Manuscript;manuscript_r4_for_resubmission.

Case report

Title
Meningioma with remarkable multiple rosette formation: A diagnostically difficult case

AuthorKenichi Mizutani1*, M.D.; Satoko Nakada1, M.D.; Akira Tamase2, M.D., Ph.D.; Osamu Tachibana2,M.D., Ph.D.; Hideaki Iizuka2, M.D., Ph.D.; Takanori Hirose3, M.D., Ph.D.; Sohsuke Yamada1 , M.D.,

Ph.D.

1Departmentof Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Kanazawa Medical University, Japan;

2Department of Neurosurgery, Kanazawa Medical University, Japan;

3Department of Diagnostic Pathology, Hyogo Cancer Center, Japan.

Short running title: Rosette forming meningioma

Word count: 1162 words (Abstract 295 words); References: 5; and 1 Figure.

*Corresponding author: Kenichi Mizutani, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine,1Kanazawa Medical University, 1-1 Daigaku, Uchinada, Kahoku, Ishikawa 920-0293, Japan. Tel: 81-76-286-2211; Fax: 81-76-286-2339; and E-mail: mizutani@kanazawa-med.ac.jp.

2

Abstruct
Background: Rosette formation is a rare morphological feature in meningiomas. It can be seen in
angiomatous, meningothelial, transitional, secretory, papillary or rhabdoid subtype; however there arevery few reports of meningiomas with rosettes, and the feature itself is not criterion for the WHO

grade, so this feature sometimes makes the diagnosis difficult.

Case presentation: A 62-year-old Japanese woman stumbled and was admitted to a hospital. Magnetic
resonance imaging showed a 50 mm extra-axial tumor on the right cerebral falx. Histologically, thetumor contained multiple rosettes that had a central nuclear-free zone without a vessel core. It also

showed a sheet-like or whorled growth pattern and pseudopapillary structure. Some round tumor cells

had abundantly dense eosinophilic cytoplasm, displaying rhabdoid features. High cellularity, smallcells with a high nuclear-to-cytoplasmic ratio and prominent nucleoli were recognized, but the mitotic

activity was less than 1/10 high-power fields. The tumor was immunohistochemically positive for

EMA and synaptophysin (weakly) but negative for GFAP, Progesterone, STAT6, S-100, NeuN andmelan A. The Ki-67 labeling index was merely 0.5 %. Although ependymoma was considered as thefirst differential diagnosis, it was ruled out, as perivascular pseudorosettes and ependymal rosettes

were not seen. We ultimately made a diagnosis of atypical meningioma with a rosette-like andpseudopapillary pattern, WHO grade Ⅱ.

Discussion and Conclusion: The meningiomas in this case showed remarkable rosette formation, but3as this is not criterion for deciding WHO grade, grading was diagnostically difficult. Papillarymeningioma was also considered as a critical differential diagnosis; however, our final diagnosis wasmade after considering the very low mitotic activity and Ki-67 labeling index, which were notconsistent with WHO grade Ⅲ. This case was very unique and diagnostically difficult. This report
may be an aid for the diagnosis of pathologically unusual entity.

Key words: meningioma, rosette formation, atypical meningioma, pseudopapillary.

BackgroundMeningiomas are common intracranial neoplasm and categorized as WHO grade Ⅰ to Ⅲ.
Most meningiomas correspond to WHO grade Ⅰ. WHO grade Ⅱ meningiomas consist of chordoid,
clear cell or atypical meningioma, and those of WHO grade Ⅲ contain papillary, rhabdoid oranaplastic meningioma. It has been described that recurrence rates of benign meningioma are about 7-25 %, whereas that of atypical meningioma is 29-52 %, and anaplastic meningioma recur in 50-94 %[1]. A study reported recurrence rate of papillary meningioma up to 59% [2]. Clinically, it is thus very

critical to distinguish each grade meningioma only by microscopic findings.

Meningiomas show much variety of morphology and rosette formation is a rare morphologicalfeature of the tumor. It could be seen in angiomatous, meningothelial, transitional, secretory, papillary4

or rhabdoid subtype among them; however there are very few reports of the tumor with rosettes [3-5].

In addition, the feature itself is not criterion for deciding WHO grade. Therefore the feature sometimes

makes diagnosis difficult.

Case presentation
A 62-year-old Japanese woman stumbled and was admitted to a hospital. Computed tomography(CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed 50 mm extra-axial tumor on the cerebral falx

in the front region of right hemisphere (Figure 1A). The tumor showed calcification on CT. The mass

showed iso-signal intensity on T1-weighted MRI and slight high-signal intensity on T2-weighted MRI.

She was clinically diagnosed with meningioma. The tumor connected to the deeper edge of the cerebral

falx was surgically removed.

Histologically, the tumor contained multiple rosettes that had a central nuclear-free zone filledwith fibrillar cytoplasmic processes without vessel core (Figure 1B, C). It showed a sheet-like orwhorled growth pattern and pseudopapillary structure (Figure 1D). Psammoma bodies, intranuclear

pseudoinclusions, abundant hyalinized vessels and brownish-granule deposition were also seen. Thetumor was consisted of spindle cells with large, oval-shaped nuclei and eosinophilic cytoplasm. Someround tumor cells had abundantly dense eosinophilic cytoplasm, displaying rhabdoid features (Figure1E). High cellularity, small cells with a high nuclear-to-cytoplasmic ratio and prominent nucleoli were5recognized (Figure 1F), but the mitotic activity was less than 1/10 high-power fields. No obvious

necrosis was seen. Immunohistochemistry revealed that the tumor was positive for EMA (Figure 1G),

weakly positive for synaptophysin (Figure 1H) and negative for GFAP, Progesterone, STAT6, S-100,

NeuN and melan A. Ki-67 labeling index of the tumor was merely 0.5 %. We ultimately made adiagnosis of atypical meningioma with a rosette-like and pseudopapillary pattern, WHO grade Ⅱ. No

recurrence has been reported for a year since the operation.

Discussion and Conclusion
The remarkable point of this case was that this tumor showed diffuse and multiple rosetteformation. This is a very unique characteristic feature. Rosette formation is a morphological variantof meningioma and a rare feature. Ependymoma was considered as the initial differential diagnosis,

since rosette formation is a known sign of ependymal differentiation. Perivascular pseudorosettes andependymal rosettes are key features for the diagnosis of ependymoma. Perivascular pseudorosettes

have a blood vessel core and perivascular anucleate zone. Ependymal rosettes are formed by columnar

tumor cells arranged around a central lumen, and EMA immunoreactivity along the luminal surface ofependymal rosettes can be observed. Immunoreactivity for GFAP is usually observed in ependymoma.

However rosettes of ependymoma were not seen in our case, and the cells were negative for GFAP.

Therefore, based on these findings, ependymoma was ruled out.

6Papillary glioneuronal tumor, meningeal melanocytoma and solitary fibrous tumor were also

considered as differential diagnosis. Papillary glioneuronal tumor consists of glial cells forming a

pseudopapillary structure with a hyalinized vessel core and neurocytes filling the interpapillary space

and is usually positive for GFAP, S-100, NeuN and synaptophysin. In our case, although the tumor

cells were weakly positive for synaptophysin, they were negative for GFAP, S-100 and NeuN. A

pseudopapillary structure with glial cells and neurocytes was not observed. Meningeal melanocytoma

and solitary fibrous tumor sometimes form a sheet-like and whorled growth pattern that resembles themorphology of meningiomas; the former is positive for melan A, while the latter is positive for STAT6.

The tumor cells were also negative for these markers in the present case.

The tumor in our patient showed a whorled growth pattern and was positive for EMA. Thesefindings were consistent with meningioma. While multiple rosette formation was undoubtedly themost remarkable feature, this is not a criterion for deciding on the WHO grade of meningioma, sograding was diagnostically difficult in this case. Papillary meningioma, which is a rare variant definedby the perivascular pseudopapillary pattern that corresponds to WHO grade Ⅲ, was also considered
as a critical differential diagnosis because a pseudopapillary pattern was observed; however the tumor
was not consistent with WHO grade Ⅲ, with its extremely low mitotic activity and Ki-67 labelingindex. Considering the increased cellularity, small cells with a high nuclear-to-cytoplasmic ratio andprominent nucleoli, the final diagnosis was atypical meningioma with a rosette-like and7

pseudopapillary pattern, WHO grade Ⅱ.
We encountered a very rare and diagnostically difficult case of meningioma with remarkablemultiple rosette formation. This unique case is worth reporting and may be an aid for the diagnosis ofpathologically unusual entity.

References
1. Louis DN, Lhgaki H, Wiestler OD, Cavenee WK. WHO classification of tumours of the central

nervous system, revised 4th edition. IARC, Lyon (2016).

2. Wang DJ, Zheng MZ, Gong Y, Xie Q, Wang Y, Cheng HX, Mao Y, Zhong P, Che XM, Jiang CC,Huang FP, Zheng K, Li SQ, Gu YX, Bao WM, Yang BJ, Wu JS, Xie LQ, Tang HL, Zhu HD, ChenXC, Zhou LF. Papillary meningioma: clinical and histopathological observation. International journalof clinical and experimental pathology 6 (2013) 878-888.

3. Liverman C, Mafra M, Chuang SS, Shivane A, Chakrabarty A, Highley R, Hilton DA, Byrne NP,Wesseling P, Perry A. A clinicopathologic study of 11 rosette-forming meningiomas: a rare andpotentially confusing pattern. Acta Neuropathol 130 (2015) 311-313.

4. Tada T, Ishii K, Oshima S, Hara H, Kobayashi S. Secreoty meningioma associated with numerous

meningothelial rosettes. Acta Neuropathol 84 (1992) 342-345.

5. Yamashima T. Meningothelial Rosettes in the Canine Subarachnoid Space. Acta Neuropathol 66

8(1985) 223-232.

List of Abbreviations UsedCT, computed tomography; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; WHO, world health organization;

EMA, epithelial membrane antigen; GFAP, glial fibrillary acidic protein; STAT6, signal transducer

and activator of transcription 6.

Declarations

Funding
The authors declare that they received no funding for this report.

Conflicts of Interests
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interests.

Acknowledgements
We would like to thank all members of our department for their expert technical assistance and general

support.

910Figure legends
Figure 1. An MRI scan, microscopic findings and immunohistochemical findings of specimen.

(A) T2-waighted MRI showed a 50 mm extra-axial tumor on the right cerebral falx. (B) The tumor
had multiple rosettes. Bar = 500 μm (H&E staining) (original magnification: × 40).

(C) The rosettes

had a central nuclear-free zone without a vessel core. The central area was filled with fibrillar
cytoplasmic processes. Bar = 100 μm (H&E staining) (original magnification: × 200). (D) The tumor
also had a pseudopapillary structure. Bar = 100 μm (H&E staining) (original magnification: × 200).
(E) Rhabdoid features were seen. Bar = 50 μm (H&E staining) (original magnification: × 400). (F)High cellularity, small cells with a high nuclear-to-cytoplasmic ratio and prominent nucleoli were seen.
Bar = 50 μm (H&E staining) (original magnification: × 400). (G, H) Immunohistochemistry revealed

that the tumor cells were positive for EMA (G) and synaptophysin (weakly) (H). Ependymal rosettes
were not observed on immunostaining for EMA (G). Bar = 50 μm (original magnification: × 400).

11Figure

Click here to access/download;Figure;fig_r1_submission.pptx

Figure 1ABCE

FGDEMA

Hsynaptophysin