Dataset for Reporting of Malignant Mesothelioma of the Pleura or Peritoneum: Recommendations From the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR)

CONTEXT

-The International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting is a not-for-profit organization formed by the Royal Colleges of Pathologists of Australasia and the United Kingdom; the College of American Pathologists; the Canadian Association of Pathologists-Association Canadienne des Pathologists, in association with the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer; and the European Society of Pathology. Its goal is to produce common, internationally agreed upon, evidence-based datasets for use throughout the world.

OBJECTIVE

-To describe a dataset developed by the Expert Panel of the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting for reporting malignant mesothelioma of both the pleura and peritoneum. The dataset is composed of "required" (mandatory) and "recommended" (nonmandatory) elements.

DESIGN

-Based on a review of the most recent evidence and supported by explanatory commentary.

RESULTS

-Eight required elements and 7 recommended elements were agreed upon by the Expert Panel to represent the essential information for reporting malignant mesothelioma of the pleura and peritoneum.

CONCLUSIONS

-In time, the widespread use of an internationally agreed upon, structured, pathology dataset for mesothelioma will lead not only to improved patient management but also provide valuable data for research and international benchmarks.

Gleason and Fuhrman no longer make the grade

Grading is an important prognostic parameter for prostate adenocarcinoma and renal cell carcinoma (RCC); however, the most frequently used classifications fail to account for advances in our understanding of the diagnostic features, classification and/or behaviour of these tumours. In 2005 and 2014, the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) proposed changes to Gleason scoring with the adoption of the ISUP grading for prostate cancer in 2014 (grade 1, score 3 + 3; grade 2, score 3 + 4; grade 3, score 4 + 3; grade 4, score 8; grade 5, score 9-10). Internationally the Fuhrman grading system is widely employed despite criticisms related to its application, validity, and reproducibility. In 2012, the ISUP established a grading system for RCC (grade 1, the nucleolus is not seen or is inconspicuous and basophilic at ×400 magnification; grade 2, nucleoli are eosinophilic and clearly visible at ×400 magnification; grade 3, nucleoli are clearly visible at ×100 magnification; grade 4, tumours show extreme pleomorphism or rhabdoid and/or sarcomatoid morphology). This grading has been validated for clear cell RCC and papillary RCC. It was further recommended that chromophobe RCC not be graded. For other morphotypes of RCC, ISUP grading has not been validated as a prognostic parameter, but can be used for descriptive purposes.

[Vancouver classification of renal tumors: Recommendations of the 2012 consensus conference of the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP)]

The 2012 consensus conference of the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) has formulated recommendations on classification, prognostic factors and staging as well as immunohistochemistry and molecular pathology of renal tumors. Agreement was reached on the recognition of five new tumor entities: tubulocystic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), acquired cystic kidney disease-associated RCC, clear cell (tubulo) papillary RCC, microphthalmia transcription factor family RCC, in particular t(6;11) RCC and hereditary leiomyomatosis-associated RCC. In addition three rare forms of carcinoma were considered as emerging or provisional entities: thyroid-like follicular RCC, succinate dehydrogenase B deficiency-associated RCC and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) translocation RCC. In the new ISUP Vancouver classification, modifications to the existing 2004 World Health Organization (WHO) specifications are also suggested. Tumor morphology, a differentiation between sarcomatoid and rhabdoid and tumor necrosis were emphasized as being significant prognostic parameters for RCC. The consensus ISUP grading system assigns clear cell and papillary RCCs to grades 1-3 due to nucleolar prominence and grade 4 is reserved for cases with extreme nuclear pleomorphism, sarcomatoid and/or rhabdoid differentiation. Furthermore, consensus guidelines were established for the preparation of samples. For example, agreement was also reached that renal sinus invasion is diagnosed when the tumor is in direct contact with the fatty tissue or loose connective tissue of the sinus (intrarenal peripelvic fat) or when endothelialized cavities within the renal sinus are invaded by the tumor, independent of the size. The importance of biomarkers for the diagnostics or prognosis of renal tumors was also emphasized and marker profiles were formulated for use in specific differential diagnostics.

Percutaneous renal tumour biopsy

The use of percutaneous renal tumour biopsy (RTB) as a diagnostic tool for the histological characterization of renal masses has increased dramatically within the last 30 years. This increased utilization has paralleled advances in imaging techniques and an evolving knowledge of the clinical value of nephron sparing surgery. Improved biopsy techniques using image guidance, coupled with the use of smaller gauge needles has led to a decrease in complication rates. Reports from series containing a large number of cases have shown the non-diagnostic rate of RTB to range from 4% to 21%. Re-biopsy has been shown to reduce this rate, while the use of molecular markers further improves diagnostic sensitivity. In parallel with refinements of the biopsy procedure, there has been a rapid expansion in our understanding of the complexity of renal cell neoplasia. The 2013 Vancouver Classification is the current classification for renal tumours, and contains five additional entities recognized as novel forms of renal malignancy. The diagnosis of tumour morphotype on RTB is usually achievable on routine histology; however, immunohistochemical studies may be of assistance in difficult cases. The morphology of the main tumour subtypes, based upon the Vancouver Classification, is described and differentiating features are discussed.

Update for the practicing pathologist: The International Consultation On Urologic Disease-European association of urology consultation on bladder cancer

The International Consultations on Urological Diseases are international consensus meetings, supported by the World Health Organization and the Union Internationale Contre le Cancer, which have occurred since 1981. Each consultation has the goal of convening experts to review data and provide evidence-based recommendations to improve practice. In 2012, the selected subject was bladder cancer, a disease which remains a major public health problem with little improvement in many years. The proceedings of the 2nd International Consultation on Bladder Cancer, which included a 'Pathology of Bladder Cancer Work Group,' have recently been published; herein, we provide a summary of developments and consensus relevant to the practicing pathologist. Although the published proceedings have tackled a comprehensive set of issues regarding the pathology of bladder cancer, this update summarizes the recommendations regarding selected issues for the practicing pathologist. These include guidelines for classification and grading of urothelial neoplasia, with particular emphasis on the approach to inverted lesions, the handling of incipient papillary lesions frequently seen during surveillance of bladder cancer patients, descriptions of newer variants, and terminology for urine cytology reporting.

The evolving classification of renal cell neoplasia

The classification of renal cell neoplasia is morphologically based; however, this has evolved over the last 35 years with the incorporation of genetic characteristics into the diagnostic features of some tumors. The 2013 Vancouver classification recognized 17 morphotypes of renal parenchymal malignancy and two benign tumors. This classification included the newly established entities tubulocystic renal cell carcinoma (RCC)), acquired cystic disease-associated RCC, clear cell (tubulo) papillary RCC, microphthalmia transcription factor family translocation RCC and hereditary leiomyomatosis RCC syndrome-associated RCC. In addition to these newly described forms of RCC there are a number of novel tumors that are currently recognized as emerging entities. These are likely to be incorporated into subsequent classifications and include thyroid-like follicular RCC, succinate dehydrogenase B mutation-associated RCC, ALK translocation RCC, tuberous sclerosis complex-associated RCC, and RCC with (angio) leiomyomatous stroma.

Cancer biomarkers: the role of structured data reporting

CONTEXT

The College of American Pathologists has been producing cancer protocols since 1986 to aid pathologists in the diagnosis and reporting of cancer cases. Many pathologists use the included cancer case summaries as templates for dictation/data entry into the final pathology report. These summaries are now available in a computer-readable format with structured data elements for interoperability, packaged as "electronic cancer checklists." Most major vendors of anatomic pathology reporting software support this model.

OBJECTIVES

To outline the development and advantages of structured electronic cancer reporting using the electronic cancer checklist model, and to describe its extension to cancer biomarkers and other aspects of cancer reporting.

DATA SOURCES

Peer-reviewed literature and internal records of the College of American Pathologists.

CONCLUSIONS

Accurate and usable cancer biomarker data reporting will increasingly depend on initial capture of this information as structured data. This process will support the standardization of data elements and biomarker terminology, enabling the meaningful use of these datasets by pathologists, clinicians, tumor registries, and patients.

The critical role of the pathologist in determining eligibility for active surveillance as a management option in patients with prostate cancer: consensus statement with recommendations supported by the College of American Pathologists, International Society of Urological Pathology, Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology, the New Zealand Society of Pathologists, and the Prostate Cancer Foundation

CONTEXT

Prostate cancer remains a significant public health problem. Recent publications of randomized trials and the US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations have drawn attention to overtreatment of localized, low-risk prostate cancer. Active surveillance, in which patients undergo regular visits with serum prostate-specific antigen tests and repeat prostate biopsies, rather than aggressive treatment with curative intent, may address overtreatment of low-risk prostate cancer. It is apparent that a greater awareness of the critical role of pathologists in determining eligibility for active surveillance is needed.

OBJECTIVES

To review the state of current knowledge about the role of active surveillance in the management of prostate cancer and to provide a multidisciplinary report focusing on pathologic parameters important to the successful identification of patients likely to succeed with active surveillance, to determine the role of molecular tests in increasing the safety of active surveillance, and to provide future directions.

DESIGN

Systematic review of literature on active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer, pathologic parameters important for appropriate stratification, and issues regarding interobserver reproducibility. Expert panels were created to delineate the fundamental questions confronting the clinical and pathologic aspects of management of men on active surveillance.

RESULTS

Expert panelists identified pathologic parameters important for management and the related diagnostic and reporting issues. Consensus recommendations were generated where appropriate.

CONCLUSIONS

Active surveillance is an important management option for men with low-risk prostate cancer. Vital to this process is the critical role pathologic parameters have in identifying appropriate candidates for active surveillance. These findings need to be reproducible and consistently reported by surgical pathologists with accurate pathology reporting.

Creation of a diagnostic wait times measurement framework based on evidence and consensus

PURPOSE

Public reporting of wait times worldwide has to date focused largely on treatment wait times and is limited in its ability to capture earlier parts of the patient journey. The interval between suspicion and diagnosis or ruling out of cancer is a complex phase of the cancer journey. Diagnostic delays and inefficient use of diagnostic imaging procedures can result in poor patient outcomes, both physical and psychosocial. This study was designed to develop a framework that could be adopted for multiple disease sites across different jurisdictions to enable the measurement of diagnostic wait times and diagnostic delay.

METHODS

Diagnostic benchmarks and targets in cancer systems were explored through a targeted literature review and jurisdictional scan. Cancer system leaders and clinicians were interviewed to validate the information found in the jurisdictional scan. An expert panel was assembled to review and, through a modified Delphi consensus process, provide feedback on a diagnostic wait times framework.

RESULTS

The consensus process resulted in agreement on a measurement framework that identified suspicion, referral, diagnosis, and treatment as the main time points for measuring this critical phase of the patient journey.

CONCLUSIONS

This work will help guide initiatives designed to improve patient access to health services by developing an evidence-based approach to standardization of the various waypoints during the diagnostic pathway. The diagnostic wait times measurement framework provides a yardstick to measure the performance of programs that are designed to manage and expedite care processes between referral and diagnosis or ruling out of cancer.

The value of collecting population-based cancer stage data to support decision-making at organizational, regional and population levels

The stage of a patient's cancer at diagnosis is essential to predict the prognosis and plan the treatment. Since 2008, stage data have been collected on all Ontario patients with breast, colorectal, lung and prostate cancers and are linked to other data collected by Cancer Care Ontario. Here, an analysis of such data is presented. How it can be used to assess the value of screening programs, inform resource allocation, evaluate compliance with treatment guidelines, compare survival trends and enhance the spectrum of cancer control activities across the province is demonstrated. International comparisons can also be made.

Diagnostic criteria for ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate: interobserver variability among 20 expert uropathologists

AIMS

Ductal adenocarcinoma of the prostate (DAC) is clinically important, because its behaviour may differ from that of acinar adenocarcinoma. Our aims were to investigate the interobserver variability of this diagnosis among experts in uropathology and to define diagnostic criteria.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Photomicrographs of 21 carcinomas with ductal features were distributed among 20 genitourinary pathologists from eight countries. DAC was diagnosed by 18 observers (mean 13.2 cases, range 6-19). In 11 (52%) cases, a 2/3 consensus was reached for a diagnosis of DAC, and in five (24%) there was consensus against. In DAC, the respondents reported papillary architecture (86%), stratification of nuclei (82%), high-grade nuclear features (54%), tall columnar epithelium (53%), elongated nuclei (52%), cribriform architecture (40%), and necrosis (7%). The most important diagnostic feature reported for DAC was papillary architecture (59%), whereas nuclear and cellular features were considered to be most important in only 2-11% of cases. The most common differential diagnoses were intraductal prostate cancer (52%), high-grade PIN (37%), and acinar adenocarcinoma (17%). The most common reason for not diagnosing DAC was lack of typical architecture (33%).

CONCLUSIONS

Papillary architecture was the most useful diagnostic feature of DAC, and nuclear and cellular features were considered to be less important.

[Benign mimickers of the prostate cancer. Diagnostic challenges]

The diagnosis of prostate cancer (PCa), especially limited adenocarcinoma on needle biopsy, is often challenging. Before making diagnosis of PCa, it is prudent for the pathologist to consider different benign patterns that may lead to a false positive interpretation. Histoanatomic structures such as seminal vesicles, Cowper's glands and paraganglia along with hyperplasia, atrophy with its different patterns and adenosis may generate difficulties in differential diagnosis. Furthermore, inflammatory processes and post-treatment changes may cause problems. The above entities can in some instances simulate low-grade and less commonly high grade PCa. Knowledge of these patterns and application of appropriate immunohistochemistry will lead the pathologist to a correct diagnosis.

Multifocal high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia is still a significant risk factor for adenocarcinoma

Collapse

A rare case of carcinoma cuniculatum of the penis in a 55-year-old

Carcinoma cuniculatum of the penis is an extremely rare variant ofsquamous cell carcinoma characterized by an endophytic deeplybranching and burrowing growth pattern. One documented caseseries demonstrated afflicted patients ranging in age from 73-83years with the tumour located on the glans penis, coronal sulcusor foreskin. We report a case of a 55-year-old with disease locatedon the ventral aspect of the shaft of the penis. The tumour wasinvasive into the deep dermal connective tissue, comparativelysuperficial to all previous documented cases. He subsequentlyunderwent a partial penectomy. The case is discussed with a briefreview of the literature.