#PAGE_PARAMS# #ADS_HEAD_SCRIPTS# #MICRODATA#

Rhabdomyosarcoma of the clivus – a case report 153


Authors: T. Haličková 1,2;  M. Sičák 1;  A. Kališ 3;  K. Obtulovičová 1
Published in: Otorinolaryngol Foniatr, 74, 2025, No. 2, pp. 153-158.
Category: Case Reports
doi: https://doi.org/10.48095/ccorl2025153

Overview

Rhabdomyosarcoma is a highly malignant mesenchymal tumor growing out of the primitive mesenchyme, which is (usually) differentiated into predominantly striated skeletal muscle. It is the most common soft tissue sarcoma in childhood, with a predilection site that occurs in the head and neck area. Multimodal approaches in treatment include surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy. We present a case of a 6-year-old girl with a history of nasal obstruction and mucus secretion more on the left side, with loss of smell and headache above the left eye. Through clinical examination, a pink tumor was detected in the left nasal cavity. CT and MRI were complemented and showed a tumor mass filling the entire nasopharynx, propagated into the left sphenoid cavity, to the clivus, and to the prevertebral space; the tumor mass completely obturated both choanae. The patient underwent endoscopic endonasal resection of the skull base tumor using CT navigation. Embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma has been confirmed. In the postoperative period, the patient underwent adjuvant oncology treatment, and control biopsies at 2 and 16 months after surgery were negative. The patient is now three years after surgery – clinically free of signs of tumor recurrence. Conclusion: Rhabdomyosarcoma, like other tumors in the skull base region, is a challenge for the surgeon due to the location in which complete resection of the tumor is sometimes very difficult or impossible. Meticulous preoperative analysis of imaging examinations, as well as intraoperative use of CT/MRI navigation, make this possible. Complete removal of the tumor increases the patient‘s chance for successful treatment.

Keywords:

rhabdomyosarcoma – skull base tumor – endonasal endoscopic resection

Introduction

Rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) is defined as a highly malignant mesenchymal tumor growing out of the primitive mesenchyme, which is (usually) differentiated into predominantly striated skeletal muscle [1]. It is the most common sarcoma of soft tissues in children, while the predilection area of occurrence in patients younger than 15 years is in the head and neck area (35–40%) [2]. According to the location of head and neck RMS, we divide it into parameningeal, orbital, and nonparameningeal. Parameningeal RMS includes the sinuses, nasal cavity, nasopharynx, parapharynx, skull base, middle ear, mastoid, fossa infratemporalis, and pterygopalatine. A multimodal approach is used in the treatment, which consists of a combination of surgical treatment, radiotherapy, and multi-agent chemotherapy.

1. The preoperative axial CT scan showing the tumorous mass in the sphenoid sinuses and clivus, more on the left side, osteolytic process (arrow) and the entire nasopharynx fi lled with tumor mass.
The preoperative axial CT scan showing the tumorous mass in the sphenoid sinuses and clivus, more on the left side, osteolytic process (arrow) and the entire nasopharynx fi lled with tumor mass.
Obr. 1. Predoperačné axiálne CT vyšetrenie zobrazujúce nádorovú masu vo sfenoidálnych
dutinách a v oblasti klivu, viac vľavo, osteolytický proces (šípka) a celý
nosohltan vyplnený nádorovou masou.

A case study

We present a case of a 6-year-old girl who attended the outpatient clinic of the tertiary referral center in March 2021 with a 1-month history of nasal obstruction and congestion, mucus secretion more on the left side, with loss of smell, and headache above the left eye. Through rhinoendoscopic examination, stagnant mucus was detected on both sides of the nasal cavity; after suction, a pink tumor was visible in the left nasal cavity, impassable to the nasopharynx by the endoscope.

CT scan (Fig. 1) showed the bulky tumorous mass measuring 47 × 26 × 31 mm, which filled the entire nasopharynx; it propagated a little more to the left and locally destroyed the surrounding structures via osteolytic process. It propagated asymmetrically and more prominently into the left sphenoid cavity; at the back, it propagated up to the clivus and the prevertebral space at the height of the atlas; in the front, it propagated into the back half of the nasal cavity, completely obstructing the at the back. The tumorous mass completely obturated both choanae; caudally, it was bordered by the palate.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (Fig. 2) showed a vascularized tumorous lesion of the nasopharynx that spread to the nasal cavity and sphenoid sinuses, destroying the skeleton without pathological cervical lymphadenopathy. The patient underwent endoscopic endonasal navigated resection of the tumor of the skull base (clivus, sphenoid sinuses, nasopharynx, palate, septum posterior part – midline), where the tumor obturated the nasal cavity on both sides, pushed the septum to the sides, filled the nasopharynx, sphenoid sinuses, and posterior ethmoids, and insisted and marginally infiltrated the upper surface of the soft and posterior palate. We continued with the centripetal resection of the tumor; the origin of the tumor was probably in the clivus area. Part of the tumor specimen was sent in for intraoperative biopsy with the finding of an unspecified malignant undifferentiated tumor.

2. Left: the MRI in T1-weighted sequence (sagittal view) shows the extension of the tumor from the area of clivus and prevertebral space to the palate and nasal cavity.Middle and right: the MRI in T2-weighted sequence (axial and agittal view) shows the osteolytic changes in surrounding structures (arrow).
Left: the MRI in T1-weighted sequence (sagittal view) shows the extension of the tumor from the area of clivus and prevertebral space to the palate and nasal cavity.Middle and right: the MRI in T2-weighted sequence (axial and agittal view) shows the osteolytic changes in surrounding structures (arrow).
Obr. 2. Vľavo: MR v T1-váženej sekvencii (sagitálny pohľad) ukazuje rozšírenie nádoru z oblasti klivu a prevertebrálneho
priestoru na podnebie a nosovú dutinu. Uprostred a vpravo: MR v T2-váženej sekvencii (axiálny a sagitálny pohľad) ukazuje
osteolytické zmeny v okolitých štruktúrach (šípka).

3. Histopathological fi ndings. Left: clusters of small round blue cells surrounded by fi brovascular structures (hematoxylin and eosin, magnifi cation 100×).Middle: intact epithelial layer (hematoxylin and eosin, magnifi cation 200×). Right: subepithelial difuse immunoreactivity for vimentin in cells of mesenchymal origin (vimentin, magnifi cation 200×).
Histopathological fi ndings. Left: clusters of small round blue cells surrounded by fi brovascular structures (hematoxylin and eosin, magnifi cation 100×).Middle: intact epithelial layer (hematoxylin and eosin, magnifi cation 200×).
Right: subepithelial difuse immunoreactivity for vimentin in cells of mesenchymal origin (vimentin, magnifi cation 200×).
Obr. 3. Histopatologické nálezy. Vľavo: zhluky malých okrúhlych modrých buniek obklopených fi brovaskulárnymi
štruktúrami (hematoxylín a eozín, zväčšenie 100×). Uprostred: intaktná epitelová vrstva (hematoxylín a eozín, zväčšenie
200×). Vpravo: subepiteliálna difúzna imunoreaktivita pre vimentín v bunkách mezenchymálneho pôvodu (vimentín,
zväčšenie 200×).

The postoperative course was completely uneventful. The patient received a transfusion of 1 transfusion unit of erythrocyte mass and was discharged on the 7th postoperative day. Complementary staging examinations (CT of the neck and chest, USG of the abdomen, PET/CT scan) showed no distant metastases.

4. The MRI in T1(left) and T2 (right) weighted sequence two years after surgery, no evidence of tumor recurrence.
The MRI in T1(left) and T2 (right) weighted sequence two years after surgery, no evidence of tumor recurrence.
Obr. 4. MR v T1(vľavo) a T2 (vpravo) váženej sekvencii dva roky po operácii, bez
známok recidívy nádoru.

A definitive histopathological examination confirmed a highly malignant small blue cell sarcoma. The phenotype favored the diagnosis of poorly differentiated vs. embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma (Fig. 3). Genetic examination confirmed a negative status of the fusion of the investigated genes.

According to the multidisciplinary tumor board recommendation, the patient was referred for adjuvant chemotherapy treatment. According to the Frontline and Relapsed Rhabdomyosarcoma Protocol (FaR-RMS), the patient was in subgroup A (tumor size under 5 cm, age under ten years, N0, fusion status – negative). Intravenous VA-V-V-VA chemotherapy (vincristine + actinomycin D, 16 cycles in total) was administered to the patient at weekly intervals. After the first four cycles, there was a 3-week therapeutic break, during which control biopsies were scheduled. On the follow-up MRI in April 2021, there was a finding of irregularity of the contour of the clivus with indicated inhomogeneity, where a possible residue couldn’t be excluded, and there were postoperative changes of the dorsal wall of the nasopharynx, cystic lesions of the sphenoid sinuses, and maxillary sinusitis on the left. In May 2021, the patient underwent endoscopic revision with resection of suspected persistence and control biopsies – definitive histological examination confirmed only chronic inflammatory changes and non-specific granulation tissue without tumor infiltration. The patient subsequently continued with adjuvant chemotherapy, completed in September 2021. During further outpatient check-ups, the patient was doing well; the local finding was no signs of recurrence; and the control MRI was performed every 3–6 months and showed no signs of tumor recurrence (Fig. 4). The last control biopsies 16 months after the surgery were also negative. The patient continued to be regularly monitored in the ENT and Children‘s Hemato-oncology clinics.

 

Discussion

Malignancies in childhood are less common than in adults and differ in the prevalence of individual histological subtypes. While epithelial tumors (carcinomas) predominate in adults, mesenchymal tumors such as lymphomas and sarcomas (rhabdomyosarcoma) are most common in children [3]. Rhabdomyosarcomas make up 4.5–7% of all childhood malignancies and 40–50% of soft tissue sarcomas [4, 5]. Although most cases of RMS occur sporadically, they can develop due to various genetic mutations, such as in Li-Fraumeni syndrome, Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome, von Recklinghausen‘s disease, cardiofaciocutaneous syndrome, Noonan syndrome, and Costello syndrome [4, 6]. The association of RMS with these syndromes has made RMS genetics an area of intense study. Decades of targeted sequencing and microarray methods led to the discovery of loss of heterozygosity at 11p15.512; mutations are in TP53, 13 NRAS, KRAS, HRAS, 14 PIK3CA, CTNNB1,15, and FGFR416; and characteristic translocations involve the PAX3 or PAX7 genes with FOXO1, which defined the genomic characteristics often associated with the histological and clinical features of this disease [6]. Next-generation sequencing studies have confirmed that RMS should not be diagnosed by histology alone, but by the presence (fusion-positive RMS) or absence (fusion-negative RMS) of a PAX3/7 gene fusion [7].

Based on the location of head and neck RMS, we divide it into parameningeal, orbital, and nonparameningeal. Parameningeal location is considered an unfavorable prognostic factor for frequent infiltration of the central nervous system (CNS) and worse surgical resectability [1, 4, 8]. RMS in this area is also treacherous in that, due to the lack of symptoms, it is diagnosed later and often already at an advanced stage. Orbital RMS affects the area of the orbit and eyelashes. Nonpara- meningeal RMS affects the parotid region, scalp, cheeks, oral cavity, oropharynx, hypopharynx, larynx, thyroid and parathyroid glands, and neck.

The fourth edition of the WHO classification distinguishes four histological types of rhabdomyosarcoma: embryonal, alveolar, spindle cell/sclerosing, and pleomorphic. In this classification, the botryoid variant of RMS was classified under the typical embryonal type [9, 10]

A multimodal approach is used in the treatment, which consists of a combination of surgical treatment, radiotherapy, and multi-agent chemotherapy. This approach significantly increased patient survival [1, 4, 8, 11–15]. As with other types of tumors, the goal of surgical treatment for RMS is to remove the tumor completely. Radical resection with histopathologically-confirmed negative margins guarantees a favorable prognosis, and at the same time, the possibility of avoiding adjuvant radiotherapy [11, 12, 14, 16–18]. Due to the variability of the primary tumor locations, complete resection is often difficult. These are mainly tumors in parameningeal locations that can grow for a long time without clinical symptoms, tumors with larger dimensions reaching the base of the skull, and with the presence of intracranial spread [4, 8]. In our patient, we chose endoscopic trans-nasal tumor resection with CT navigation. This approach is a minimally invasive approach that allows the removal of various pathologies in the sella turcica and skull base [19]. Orbital RMS has a very good prognosis after treatment with chemotherapy and radiotherapy; surgical treatment offers no advantage over chemotherapy and radiotherapy in terms of survival and is therefore limited to diagnostic biopsy [11, 20]. This combined modality is a treatment modality for orbital RMS, thus avoiding significant morbidity from eye loss [17]. Chemotherapy is an integral part of multimodal therapy for RMS. For newly diagnosed pediatric patients, multimodal chemotherapy regimens are currently assigned according to the classification of patients into clinical groups according to risk factors (Tab. 1). The drugs used are combinations of long-established cytotoxic agents, including alkylating agents, vincristine, and actinomycin D. Within the concept of a multimodal treatment approach, radiotherapy is also an important part of the treatment. It depends on the location of the primary tumor, the extent of the disease after initial surgical treatment, and the histological subtype of the tumor. Patients with a completely resected embryological type of RMS do not require radiotherapy [12], but it is indicated in patients with a completely resected alveolar type of RMS [16, 21]. Radiotherapy is generally reserved for patients with histologically unfavorable, unresectable tumors and as adjuvant therapy after resection with positive surgical margins [22]. Our patient had an R0 resection, the embryonal subtype of the tumor, so radiotherapy was not indicated for her.

The staging system was developed as a modified TNM, similar to the classification used by the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) (Tab. 1) [15]. During the development of the Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group (IRSG) protocols, it became clear that it is necessary to adopt a preclinical staging system that does not depend on the surgeon‘s decision on how much tissue to remove or on the pathological evaluation of the specimen. TNM staging before treatment is based on the location, invasiveness, and size of the tumor, along with possible involvement of regional nodes and distant metastases (Tab. 1) [15].

1. TNM pre-treatment staging, Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group (IRSG) staging system (according to Raney et al. [15]).
TNM pre-treatment staging, Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group (IRSG) staging system (according to Raney et al. [15]).
Tab. 1. TNM staging pred liečbou, stagingový systém Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group (IRSG) (podľa Raneyho
et al. [15]).

2. Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group (IRSG) surgical-pathologic grouping system (according to Raney et al. [15]).
Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group (IRSG) surgical-pathologic grouping system (according to Raney et al. [15]).
Tab. 2. Systém chirurgicko-patologického delenia do skupín Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group (IRSG) (podľa
Raney et al. [15]).

A surgical-pathologic classification system categorizes patients according to the extent of the disease remaining after initial surgery, but before chemotherapy and radiotherapy are initiated. The staging system categorizes patients according to the amount of residual disease after initial surgery; external radiotherapy is administered according to each patient‘s group and histological subtype (Tab. 2) [23].

Currently, staging systems and classification into clinical groups (Clinical Grouping Classification, Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group, IRSG) as well as the histological subtype of the tumor or fusion status – presence or absence of PAX 3/7 gene fusion with FOXO1, are used to decide on treatment. Most alveolar RMS contains these translocations, and its presence is considered an unfavorable prognostic factor. Patients are categorized according to predicted survival using a staging system and histological subtype; different combinations of chemotherapy drugs are given accordingly. Patient survival has improved significantly over the past decades, from 25% in the 1970s to more than 70–91.3% today [1, 4, 8, 13]. This is mainly due to the multimodal approach in the treatment of these patients.

According to the Frontline and Relapsed RhabdoMyoSarcoma protocol (FaR-RMS protocol), EpSSG – European Pediatric Soft Tissue Sarcoma Group, our patient was assigned to a low-risk group (Subgroup A), and based on this protocol, underwent adjuvant chemotherapy (VA- V-V-VA, vincristine + actinomycin D, a total of 16 cycles) [24].

 

Conclusion

Rhabdomyosarcoma, like other tumors in the skull base region, is a challenge for the surgeon due to the location in which complete resection of the tumor is sometimes very difficult or impossible. Meticulous preoperative analysis of imaging examinations, as well as intraoperative use of CT/MRI navigation, make this possible. Successful complete tumor removal, together with adjuvant oncological therapy, increases the patient‘s chance for successful treatment. Regular follow-up after treatment is important for patients to track possible recurrence or metastatic spread.

Conflict of interest statement

The author declares that there is no conflict of interest related to the topic, development, or publication of this article, and that neither the preparation nor the publication of the article was supported by any pharmaceutical company. This statement also applies to all co-authors.


Sources

1. Haussler SM, Stromberg C, Olze H et al. Head and neck rhabdomyosarcoma in children: a 20-year retrospective study at a tertiary referral centre. J Cancer Res Clip Once 2018; 144 (2): 371–379. Doi: 10.1007/s00432-017-2544-x.

2. Reilly BK, Kim A, Pena MT et al. Rhabdomyosarcoma of the head and neck in children: review and update. Int J Pediatry Otorhinolaryngol 2015; 79 (9): 1477–1483. Doi: 10.1016/ j.ijporl.2015.06.032.

3. Janeček D, Bartoňková K, Vogazianos E et al. Differential Diagnostics of Expansive Processes at the Child age in ORL Area. Otorinolaryngol Foniatr 2008; 57 (2): 59–64.

4. Radzikowska J, Kukwa W, Kukwa A et al. Management of pediatric head and neck rhabdomyosarcoma: a case-series of 36 patients. Once Lett 2016; 12 (5): 3555–3562. Doi: 10.3892/ol. 2016.5072.

5. Ma X, Huang D, Zhao W et al. Clinical characteristics and prognosis of childhood rhabdomyosarcoma: a ten year retrospective multicenter study. Int J Chin Exp Med 2015; 8 (10): 17196–17205.

6. Shern JF, Yohe ME, Khan J. Pediatric Rhabdomyosarcoma. Crit Rev Oncog 2015; 20 (3–4): 227–243. Doi: 10.1615/critrevoncog.2015013800

7. Shern JF, Chen L, Chmielecki J et al. Comprehensive genomic analysis of rhabdomyosarcoma reveals a landscape of alterations affecting a common genetic axis in fusion-positive and fusion-negative tumors. Cancer Discov 2014; 4 (2): 216–231. Doi: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-13-0639.

8. Dombrowski ND, Wolter NE, Robson CD et al. Role of surgery in rhabdomyosarcoma of the head and neck in children. Laryngoscope 2020, 131 (3): E984–E992. Doi: 10.1002/lary.28785.

9. Rudzinski ER, Anderson JR, Hawkins DS et al. The World Health Organization Classification of Skeletal Muscle Tumors in Paediatric Rhabdomyosarcoma. A Report From the Children’s Oncology Group. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2015; 139 (10): 1281-1287. Doi: 10.5858/arpa.2014-0475-OA.

10. Fletcher CDM, Bridge JA, Hogendoorn PCW et al. WHO Classification of Tumors of Soft Tissue and Bone. 4th ed. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2013. World Health Organization Classification of Tumors; vol. 5.

11. Maurer HM, Beltangady M, Gehan EA et al. The Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study, I: a final report. Cancer 1988; 61 (2): 209–220. Doi: 10.1002/1097-0142 (19880115) 61: 2<209:: aid-cncr2820610202>3.0.co; 2- l.

12. Maurer HM, Gehan EA, Beltangady M et al. The Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study, II: Cancer 1993; 71 (5): 1904-1922. Doi: 10.1002/10970142 (19930301) 71: 5<1904:: aid-cncr2820710530>3.0.co; 2-x.

13. Darwish C, Shim T, Sparks AD et al. Pediatric head and neck rhabdomyosarcoma: An analysis of treatment and survival in the United States (1975–2016). Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 2020; 139: 110403. Doi: 10.1016/ j.ijporl.2020.110403.

14. Kazanowska B, Reich A, Reich M et al. Remaining problems and controversies in the management of childhood head and neck soft tissue sarcomas: Retrospective (national) Multicenter Study of the Polish Pediatric Solid Tumors Group. Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2004; 21 (4): 349–363. Doi: 10.1080/08880010490440491.

15. Raney RB, Maurer HM, Anderson JR et al. The Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group (IRSG): Major Lessons From the IRS-I Through IRS-IV Studies as Background for the Current IRS-V Treatment Protocols. Sarcoma 2001; 5 (1): 9–15. Doi: 10.1080/13577140120048890.

16. Wharam MD, Beltangady MS, Heyn RM et al. Pediatric orofacial and laryngopharyngeal rhabdomyosarcoma: an Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study report. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1987; 113 (11): 1225–1227. Doi: 10.1001/archotol.1987.01860110091014.

17. Daya H, Chan HSL, Sirkin W et al. Pediatric Rhabdomyosarcoma of The Head and Neck Is There a Place for Surgical Management? Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2000; 126 (4): 468–472. Doi: 10.1001/archotol.126.4.468.

18. Smith LM, Anderson JR, Qualman SJ et al. Which patients with microscopic disease and rhabdomyosarcoma experience relapse after therapy? A report from the soft tissue sarcoma commitee of the children’s oncology group. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19 (20): 4058–4064. Doi: 10.1200/JCO.2001.19.20.4058.

19. Matoušek P, Lipina R, Paleček T et al. Endo- scopic Transnasal Surgery of Sellar Region. Otorinolarynol Foniatr 2012; 61 (3): 172–177.

20. Iatrou I, Theologie-Lygidakis N, Schoinohoriti O et al. Rhabdomyosarcoma of the maxillofacial region in children and adolescents: report of 9 cases and literature review. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2017; 45 (6): 831–838. Doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2017.03.005.

21. Wolden SL, Anderson JR, Crist WM et al. Indications for radiotherapy and chemotherapy after complete resection in rhabdomyosarcoma: a report from the Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Studies I to III. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17 (11): 3468–3475. Doi: 10.1200/JCO.1999.17.11.3468.

22. Ray A, Huh WW. Current state-of-the-art systemic therapy for pediatric soft tissue sarcomas. Curr Oncol Rep 2012; 14 (4): 311–319. Doi: 10.1007/s11912-012-0243-y.

23. Lawrence W Jr, Anderson J, Gehan EA et al. Pretreatment TNM staging of childhood rhabdomyosarcoma: a report of the Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group. Cancer 1997; 80 (6): 1165–1170.

24. FaR – RMS. An overarching study for children and adults with Frontline and Relapsed RhabdoMyoSarcoma Version 1.0b, 11th November 2019: 44. Table 3: Risk Group Assignment.

Labels
Audiology Paediatric ENT ENT (Otorhinolaryngology)
Topics Journals
Login
Forgotten password

Enter the email address that you registered with. We will send you instructions on how to set a new password.

Login

Don‘t have an account?  Create new account

#ADS_BOTTOM_SCRIPTS#