{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030181086519114688, 'fraction_numerical': 0.025150905432595575, 'mean_word_length': 4.784883720930233, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Coexistent atypical adenomatous hyperplasia, primary lung adenocarcinoma and pleural mesothelioma in an asbestos‐exposed subject

tumour was indicative of either a vascular tumour or a solitary fibrous tumour. However, the histological examination and t(X;18) were diagnostic of SS. The CD34 positivity did not rule out a diagnosis of MFSS. A recent study by Pelmus reported positive staining with CD34 in 6% (3 ⁄ 47) of MFSS. All poorly differentiated SS were negative with this marker (0 ⁄ 13). The CD34+ cases in the Pelmus study always showed focal staining and not diffuse staining as observed in our case. CD34 was found to be positive only in MFSS. However, a larger study of this SS variant is necessary to evaluate the expression of CD34. It is essential to emphasize that this case, with all tumour cells showing strong positivity for CD34, was a synovial sarcoma as confirmed by t(X;18). The pivotal place of CD34 in the diagnosis of synovial sarcomas warrants further investigation.