Ewing Sarcoma/Primitive Neuroectodermal Tumor Involving the Duodenum

REFERENCES

1. 1.↵
   1. Stout A

   . A tumor of ulnar nerve. Proc NY Pathol Soc. 1918;18:2-12.

   OpenUrl
2. 2.↵
   1. Grünewald TGP,
   2. Cidre-Aranaz F,
   3. Surdez D,
   4. et al.

   Ewing sarcoma. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2018;4(1):5. doi: 10.1038/s41572-018-0003-x

   OpenUrlCrossRef
3. 3.↵
   1. Folpe AL,
   2. Goldblum JR,
   3. Rubin BP,
   4. et al.

   Morphologic and immunophenotypic diversity in Ewing family tumors: a study of 66 genetically confirmed cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005;29(8):1025-1033.

   OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
4. 4.↵
   The WHO Classification of Tumours Editorial Board. WHO Classification of Tumours: Soft Tissue and Bone Tumours. 5th ed. IARC Publications; 2020.
5. 5.↵
   1. Javalgi AP,
   2. Karigoudar MH,
   3. Palur K

   . Blue cell tumour at unusual site: retropritoneal Ewings sarcoma. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10(4):ED19-20. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2016/18302.7618

   OpenUrlCrossRef
6. 6.↵
   1. Coindre JM

   . Grading of soft tissue sarcomas: review and update. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006;130(10):1448-1453. doi: 10.5858/2006-130-1448-GOSTSR

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
7. 7.↵
   1. Amin MB,
   2. Edge SB,
   3. Greene FL

   , et al., eds. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 8th ed. Springer, 2017.
8. 8.↵
   1. Sadiq M,
   2. Ahmad I,
   3. Shuja J,
   4. Ahmad K

   . Primary Ewing sarcoma of the kidney: a case report and treatment review. CEN Case Rep. 2017;6(2):132-135. doi: 10.1007/s13730-017-0259-0

   OpenUrlCrossRef
9. 9.
   1. Ozaki Y,
   2. Miura Y,
   3. Koganemaru S,
   4. et al.

   Ewing sarcoma of the liver with multilocular cystic mass formation: a case report. BMC Cancer. 2015;15:16. doi: 10.1186/s12885-015-1017-3

   OpenUrlCrossRef
10. 10.↵
    1. Khuri S,
    2. Gilshtein H,
    3. Sayidaa S,
    4. Bishara B,
    5. Kluger Y

    . Primary Ewing sarcoma/primitive neuroectodermal tumor of the stomach. Case Rep Oncol. 2016;9(3):666-671. doi: 10.1159/000449126

    OpenUrlCrossRef
11. 11.↵
    1. Kie JH,
    2. Lee MK,
    3. Kim CJ,
    4. Lee K,
    5. Kwon KW,
    6. Yang WI

    . Primary Ewing's sarcoma of the duodenum: a case report. Int J Surg Pathol. 2003;11(4):331-337. doi: 10.1177/106689690301100416

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    1. Kolosov A,
    2. Dulskas A,
    3. Pauza K,
    4. Selichova V,
    5. Seinin D,
    6. Stratilatovas E

    . Primary Ewing's sarcoma in a small intestine – a case report and review of the literature. BMC Surg. 2020;20(1):113. doi: 10.1186/s12893-020-00774-z

    OpenUrlCrossRef
13. 13.↵
    1. Adair A,
    2. Harris SA,
    3. Coppen MJ,
    4. Hurley PR

    . Extraskeletal Ewings sarcoma of the small bowel: case report and literature review. J R Coll Surg Edinb. 2001;46(6):372-374.

    OpenUrlPubMed
14. 14.↵
    1. Huang L,
    2. Ke F,
    3. Wang M,
    4. Fu X,
    5. Xiao C

    . A case report of misdiagnosis of Ewing's sarcoma of the duodenum. Asian J Surg. 2021;44(1):394-395. doi: 10.1016/j.asjsur.2020.10.004

    OpenUrlCrossRef
15. 15.↵
    1. Gamberi G,
    2. Cocchi S,
    3. Benini S,
    4. et al.

    Molecular diagnosis in Ewing family tumors: the Rizzoli experience –222 consecutive cases in four years. J Mol Diagn. 2011;13(3):313-324. doi: 10.1016/j.jmoldx.2011.01.004

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
16. 16.↵
    1. Chinchilla-Tábora LM,
    2. Ortiz Rodríguez-Parets J,
    3. González Morais I,
    4. Sayagués JM,
    5. Ludeña de la Cruz MD

    . Immunohistochemical analysis of CD99 and PAX8 in a series of 15 molecularly confirmed cases of Ewing sarcoma. Sarcoma. 2020;2020:3180798. doi: 10.1155/2020/3180798

    OpenUrlCrossRef
17. 17.↵
    1. Yoshida A,
    2. Sekine S,
    3. Tsuta K,
    4. Fukayama M,
    5. Furuta K,
    6. Tsuda H

    . NKX2.2 is a useful immunohistochemical marker for Ewing sarcoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2012;36(7):993-999. doi: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e31824ee43c

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Albergo JI,
    2. Gaston CL,
    3. Laitinen M,
    4. et al.

    Ewing's sarcoma: only patients with 100% of necrosis after chemotherapy should be classified as having a good response. Bone Joint J. 2016;98-B(8):1138-1144. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.98B8.37346

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed