Article | Published:

NUTM1-rearranged neoplasia: a multi-institution experience yields novel fusion partners and expands the histologic spectrum

Modern Pathology (2019) | Download Citation


Poorly differentiated neoplasms lacking characteristic histopathologic features represent a significant challenge to the pathologist for diagnostic classification. Classically, NUT carcinoma (previously NUT midline carcinoma) is poorly differentiated but typically exhibits variable degrees of squamous differentiation. Diagnosis is genetically defined by NUTM1 rearrangement, usually with BRD4 as the fusion partner. In this multi-institutional next-generation sequencing and fluorescence in situ hybridization study, 26 new NUTM1-rearranged neoplasms are reported, including 20 NUT carcinomas, 4 sarcomas, and 2 tumors of an uncertain lineage. NUTM1 fusion partners were available in 24 of 26 cases. BRD4 was the fusion partner in 18/24 (75%) cases, NSD3 in 2/24 cases (8.3%), and BRD3 in 1/24 (4.2%) cases. Two novel fusion partners were identified: MGA in two sarcomas (myxoid spindle cell sarcoma and undifferentiated sarcoma) (2/24 cases 8.3%) and MXD4 in a round cell sarcoma in the cecum (1/24 cases 4.2%). Eleven cases tested for NUT immunoexpression were all positive, including the MGA and MXD4-rearranged tumors. Our results confirm that NUTM1 gene rearrangements are found outside the classic clinicopathological setting of NUT carcinoma. In addition, as novel fusion partners like MGA and MXD4 may not be susceptible to targeted therapy with bromodomain inhibitors, detecting the NUTM1 rearrangement may not be enough, and identifying the specific fusion partner may become necessary. Studies to elucidate the mechanism of tumorigenesis of novel fusion partners are needed.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.


  1. 1.

    Sirohi D, Garg K, Simko JP, Grenert JP. Renal NUT carcinoma: a case report. Histopathology. 2018;72:528–30.

  2. 2.

    Dickson BC, Sung YS, Rosenblum MK, Reuter VE, Harb M, Wunder JS, et al. NUTM1 gene fusions characterize a subset of undifferentiated soft tissue and visceral tumors. Am J Surg Pathol. 2018;42:636–45.

  3. 3.

    den Bakker MA, Beverloo BH, van den Heuvel-Eibrink MM, Meeuwis CA, Tan LM, Johnson LA, et al. NUT midline carcinoma of the parotid gland with mesenchymal differentiation. Am J Surg Pathol. 2009;33:1253–8.

  4. 4.

    Bauer DE, Mitchell CM, Strait KM, Lathan CS, Stelow EB, Lüer SC, et al. Clinicopathologic features and long-term outcomes of NUT midline carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18:5773–9.

  5. 5.

    French CA. Demystified molecular pathology of NUT midline carcinomas. J Clin Pathol. 2010;63:492–6.

  6. 6.

    Mertens F, Wiebe T, Adlercreutz C, Mandahl N, French CA. Successful treatment of a child with t(15;19)-positive tumor. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2007;49:1015–7.

  7. 7.

    Miettinen M. A simple method for generating multitissue blocks without special equipment. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2012;20:410–2.

  8. 8.

    Huang D, Sumegi J, Dal Cin P, Reith JD, Yasuda T, Nelson M, et al. C11orf95-MKL2 is the resulting fusion oncogene of t(11;16) (q13;p13) in chondroid lipoma. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2010;49:810–8.

  9. 9.

    French CA, Ramirez CL, Kolmakova J, Hickman TT, Cameron MJ, Thyne ME, et al. BRD-NUT oncoproteins: a family of closely related nuclear proteins that block epithelial differentiation and maintain the growth of carcinoma cells. Oncogene. 2008;27:2237–42.

  10. 10.

    Stathis A, Zucca E, Bekradda M, Gomez-Roca C, Delord JP, de La Motte Rouge T, et al. Clinical response of carcinomas harboring the BRD4-NUT oncoprotein to the targeted bromodomain Inhibitor OTX015/MK-8628. Cancer Discov. 2016;6:492–500.

  11. 11.

    Schwartz BE, Hofer MD, Lemieux ME, Bauer DE, Cameron MJ, West NH, et al. Differentiation of NUT midline carcinoma by epigenomic reprogramming. Cancer Res. 2011;71:2686–96.

  12. 12.

    Alekseyenko AA, Walsh EM, Wang X, Grayson AR, Hsi PT, Kharchenko PV, et al. The oncogenic BRD4-NUT chromatin regulator drives aberrant transcription within large topological domains. Genes Dev. 2015;29:1507–23.

  13. 13.

    Zee BM, Dibona AB, Alekseyenko AA, French CA, Kuroda MI. The oncoprotein BRD4-NUT generates aberrant histone modification patterns. PLoS ONE. 2016;11:e0163820.

  14. 14.

    Wang R, Liu W, Helfer CM, Bradner JE, Hornick JL, Janicki SM, et al. Activation of SOX2 expression by BRD4-NUT oncogenic fusion drives neoplastic transformation in NUT midline carcinoma. Cancer Res. 2014;74:3332–43.

  15. 15.

    Grayson AR, Walsh EM, Cameron MJ, Godec J, Ashworth T, Ambrose JM, et al. MYC, a downstream target of BRD-NUT, is necessary and sufficient for the blockade of differentiation in NUT midline carcinoma. Oncogene. 2014;33:1736–42.

  16. 16.

    French CA, Rahman S, Walsh EM, Kühnle S, Grayson AR, Lemieux ME, et al. NSD3-NUT fusion oncoprotein in NUT midline carcinoma: implications for a novel oncogenic mechanism. Cancer Discov. 2014;4:928–41.

  17. 17.

    Chau NG, Hurwitz S, Mitchell CM, Aserlind A, Grunfeld N, Kaplan L, et al. Intensive treatment and survival outcomes in NUT midline carcinoma of the head and neck. Cancer. 2016;122:3632–40.

  18. 18.

    Bishop JA, Westra WH. NUT midline carcinomas of the sinonasal tract. Am J Surg Pathol. 2012;36:1216–21.

  19. 19.

    Cascon A, Robledo M. MAX and MYC: a heritable breakup. Cancer Res. 2012;72:3119–24.

  20. 20.

    Alekseyenko AA, Walsh EM, Zee BM, Pakozdi T, Hsi P, Lemieux ME, et al. Ectopic protein interactions within BRD4-chromatin complexes drive oncogenic megadomain formation in NUT midline carcinoma. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2017;114:E4184–E92.

  21. 21.

    Rahman S, Sowa ME, Ottinger M, Smith JA, Shi Y, Harper JW, et al. The Brd4 extraterminal domain confers transcription activation independent of pTEFb by recruiting multiple proteins, including NSD3. Mol Cell Biol. 2011;31:2641–52.

  22. 22.

    Stathis A, Bertoni F. BET proteins as targets for anticancer treatment. Cancer Discov. 2018;8:24–36.

  23. 23.

    Tamura R, Nakaoka H, Yoshihara K, Mori Y, Yachida N, Nishikawa N, et al. Novel MXD4–NUTM1 fusion transcript identified in primary ovarian undifferentiated small round cell sarcoma. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2018;57:557–63.

  24. 24.

    Le Loarer F, Pissaloux D, Watson S, Godfraind C, Galmiche-Rolland L, Silva K, et al. Clinicopathologic features of CIC-NUTM1 sarcomas, a new molecular variant of the family of CIC-fused sarcomas. Am J Surg Pathol. 2019;43:268–76.

  25. 25.

    Schaefer IM, Dal Cin P, Landry LM, Fletcher CDM, Hanna GJ, French CA. CIC‐NUTM1 fusion: a case which expands the spectrum of NUT‐rearranged epithelioid malignancies. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2018;57:446–51.

Download references

Author information


  1. Department of Pathology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA

    • Todd M. Stevens
    •  & Diana Morlote
  2. Caris Life Sciences, Phoenix, AZ, USA

    • Joanne Xiu
    • , Jeffrey Swensen
    •  & Zoran Gatalica
  3. Mount Sinai Beth Israel Department of Pathology, New York, NY, USA

    • Margaret Brandwein-Weber
  4. Department of Pathology, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA

    • Markku M. Miettinen
  5. Department of Pathology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA

    • Julia A. Bridge


  1. Search for Todd M. Stevens in:

  2. Search for Diana Morlote in:

  3. Search for Joanne Xiu in:

  4. Search for Jeffrey Swensen in:

  5. Search for Margaret Brandwein-Weber in:

  6. Search for Markku M. Miettinen in:

  7. Search for Zoran Gatalica in:

  8. Search for Julia A. Bridge in:

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Todd M. Stevens.

About this article

Publication history