Solitary splenic metastasis from ovarian carcinosarcoma: a case report.

INTRODUCTION: Metastatic tumors to the spleen are rare but are usually found in conjunction with metastasis to other organs. The most common sources of splenic metastasis are breast, lung and colorectal cancers as well as melanoma and ovarian carcinoma. A solitary carcinosarcoma metastasis to the spleen of any origin is very rare. To the best of our knowledge, there are fewer than 30 reported cases of ovarian primary tumors with solitary metastasis to the spleen, and only three solitary primary carcinosarcomas to the spleen have been reported, of which one is female. We present what is, to the best of our knowledge, the first case of a solitary metastatic carcinosarcoma to the spleen arising from a primary ovarian carcinsarcoma. CASE PRESENTATION: A 72-year-old Hispanic woman status post-total abdominal hysterectomy for ovarian carcinosarcoma presented with complaints of early satiety and abdominal pain for the past two months with a 30-lb unintentional weight loss. An initial computed tomographic scan of her abdomen and pelvis revealed a 30 cm × 27 cm splenic mass with displacement of the left kidney, stomach and liver. The patient was found to have a solitary metastatic carcinosarcoma of the spleen with biphasic epithelial (carcinomatous) and mesenchymal (sarcomatous) elements consistent with carcinosarcoma. CONCLUSION: Carcinosarcoma of the spleen is a rare tumor. Carcinosarcomas are a biphasic neoplasm comprising malignant epithelial and mesenchymal components arising from a stem cell capable of differentiation. They can arise anywhere in the female genital tract, most commonly from the endometrium. Even though it is rare, carcinosarcomas can metastasize to the spleen. This unique case of a solitary splenic metastasis from ovarian carcinosarcoma has particular interest in medicine, especially for the specialties of surgical oncology, pathology and hematology/oncology.

Evaluation of real-time PCR laboratory-developed tests using analyte-specific reagents for cytomegalovirus quantification.

Viral load testing for cytomegalovirus (CMV) has become the standard for the diagnosis of infection and monitoring of therapy at many transplant centers. However, no viral load test has been approved by the FDA. Therefore, many laboratories rely on laboratory-developed assays. This study evaluated the performance characteristics of two real-time PCR tests developed using the artus CMV analyte-specific reagents (ASRs). One version is distributed by Abbott Molecular and the other by QIAGEN. For plasma specimens, the Abbott test had a limit of detection of 2.3 log10 copies/ml and a linear range up to at least 6.0 log10 copies/ml. Comparison of plasma viral loads using the Abbott test and the Roche Amplicor Monitor test showed a mean difference of -0.012 log10 copies/ml. In addition, the Abbott test viral loads correlated with the Digene Hybrid Capture assay ratios. Viral loads obtained from plasma specimens tested by the Abbott and QIAGEN tests were in very close agreement (mean difference, 0.144 log10 copies/ml). When the QIAGEN test was evaluated with the QIAGEN, MagNA Pure, and easyMAG extraction methods, the viral loads for all three methods were within 0.370 log10 copies/ml. Thus, there is good agreement between viral loads obtained by the different tests using the same extraction method or by the same test using different extraction methods. The availability of real-time PCR ASRs provides additional reagents that can be used for CMV viral load testing.

Umbilical cord blood screening for cytomegalovirus DNA by quantitative PCR.

BACKGROUND: Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection, which is the most common congenitally transmitted infection, affects approximately 1% of neonates worldwide. Despite its prevalence, no convenient screening test for neonatal CMV infection has been implemented. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this pilot study was to evaluate the feasibility and yield of screening umbilical cord blood for CMV DNA emiaby quantitative PCR. STUDY DESIGN: Umbilical cord blood was tested for CMV DNAemia using a commercial quantitative PCR assay. Maternal CMV serostatus at the time of delivery was assessed by testing for CMV IgG and IgM antibodies in serum. CONCLUSIONS: Screening for congenital CMV infection with PCR is easily incorporated into routine labor and delivery care using discarded cord blood specimens to identify neonates whose infection is otherwise undiagnosed. Among 433 infants tested, two (0.5%) had DNAemia detected in cord blood, one of whom was symptomatic, and both of whose mothers were CMV IgG positive and IgM negative. Viremic neonates identified by screening with PCR may be at high risk of developing long-term neurological complications of CMV infection and cannot reliably be identified using clinical presentation or maternal serology. Because of its convenience, cord blood CMV screening with PCR should be further investigated for incorporation into neonatal screening protocols.