A novel specific genetic translocation in epithelioid hemangioendotelioma, showing a fusion of the WWTR1 and CAMTA1 genes, supports the monoclonality of multifocal epithelioid hemangioendotelioma.

Like other vascular tumors, epithelioid hemangioendothelioma (EHE) is multifocal in approximately 50% of cases, and it is unclear whether the separate lesions represent multifocal disease or metastases. We hypothesized that the identification of an identical WWTR1-CAMTA1 rearrangement in different EHEs from the same patient supports the monoclonal origin of EHE. To test our hypothesis, we undertook a molecular analysis of two multicentric EHEs of the liver, including separate tumor samples from each patient. Matherial and Methods: We retrieved two cases of EHE with available tissue for molecular analysis. In both cases, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was performed to identify the presence of the WWTR1-CAMTA1 rearrangement to confirm the histologic diagnosis of EHE, as previously described. The reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) products were analyzed by electrophoresis and the RT-PCR–amplified products were sequenced using the Sanger method. Results: FISH analysis revealed signal abnormalities in both WWTR1 and CAMTA1. Combined results confirmed the presence of the t(1;3)(1p36.23;3q25.1) translocation in both cases of EHE. Using RT-PCR analysis, we found that the size of the rearranged bands was identical in the different tumors from each patient. The sequence of the fusion gene confirmed a different WWTR1-CAMTA1 rearrangement in each patient, but an identical WWTR1-CAMTA1 rearrangement in the different lesions from each patient. Discussion: Because of its generally indolent clinical course, EHE is commonly classified as a multifocal, rather than metastatic, disease. In this study, we examined two cases of multifocal liver EHE and found an identical WWTR1-CAMTA1 rearrangement in each lesion from the same patient, but not between the two patients. These findings suggest that multifocal EHE arises from metastasis of the same neoplastic clone rather than from the simultaneous formation of multiple neoplastic clones, which supports the monoclonal origin of multifocal EHE.

Comparison of affinity chromatography supports for separation of protein

Chromatography is the most widely used technique for high-resolution separation and analysis of proteins. This technique is very useful for the purification of delicate compounds, e.g. pharmaceuticals, because it is usually performed at milder conditions than separation processes typically used by chemical industry. This thesis focuses on affinity chromatography. Chromatographic processes are traditionally performed using columns packed with porous resin. However, these supports have several limitations, including the dependence on intra-particle diffusion, a slow mass transfer mechanism, for the transport of solute molecules to the binding sites within the pores and high pressure drop through the packed bed. These limitations can be overcome by using chromatographic supports like membranes or monoliths. Dye-ligands are considered important alternatives to natural ligands. Several reactive dyes, particularly Cibacron Blue F3GA, are used as affinity ligand for protein purification. Cibacron Blue F3GA is a triazine dye that interacts specifically and reversibly with albumin. The aim of this study is to prepare dye-affinity membranes and monoliths for efficient removal of albumin and to compare the three different affinity supports: membranes and monoliths and a commercial column HiTrapTM Blue HP, produced by GE Healthcare. A comparison among the three supports was performed in terms of binding capacity at saturation (DBC100%) and dynamic binding capacity at 10% breakthrough (DBC10%) using solutions of pure BSA. The results obtained show that the CB-RC membranes and CB-Epoxy monoliths can be compared to commercial support, column HiTrapTM Blue HP, for the separation of albumin. These results encourage a further characterization of the new supports examined.