Report From the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consultation Conference on Molecular Pathology of Urogenital Cancers: III: Molecular Pathology of Kidney Cancer

Renal cell carcinoma, part 1

ABSTRACT

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) encompasses a group of malignancies that originate in the epithelium of the renal cortex, most often in the upper pole of the kidney. This article, the first of a three-part series on RCC, addresses the incidence and epidemiology of RCC along with its genetic alterations, risk factors, histologic characteristics, and imaging characteristics.

New developments in existing WHO entities and evolving molecular concepts: The Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) update on renal neoplasia

The Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) reviewed recent advances in renal neoplasia, particularly post-2016 World Health Organization (WHO) classification, to provide an update on existing entities, including diagnostic criteria, molecular correlates, and updated nomenclature. Key prognostic features for clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remain WHO/ISUP grade, AJCC/pTNM stage, coagulative necrosis, and rhabdoid and sarcomatoid differentiation. Accrual of subclonal genetic alterations in clear cell RCC including SETD2, PBRM1, BAP1, loss of chromosome 14q and 9p are associated with variable prognosis, patterns of metastasis, and vulnerability to therapies. Recent National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines increasingly adopt immunotherapeutic agents in advanced RCC, including RCC with rhabdoid and sarcomatoid changes. Papillary RCC subtyping is no longer recommended, as WHO/ISUP grade and tumor architecture better predict outcome. New papillary RCC variants/patterns include biphasic, solid, Warthin-like, and papillary renal neoplasm with reverse polarity. For tumors with 'borderline' features between oncocytoma and chromophobe RCC, a term "oncocytic renal neoplasm of low malignant potential, not further classified" is proposed. Clear cell papillary RCC may warrant reclassification as a tumor of low malignant potential. Tubulocystic RCC should only be diagnosed when morphologically pure. MiTF family translocation RCCs exhibit varied morphologic patterns and fusion partners. TFEB-amplified RCC occurs in older patients and is associated with more aggressive behavior. Acquired cystic disease (ACD) RCC-like cysts are likely precursors of ACD-RCC. The diagnosis of renal medullary carcinoma requires a negative SMARCB1 (INI-1) expression and sickle cell trait/disease. Mucinous tubular and spindle cell carcinoma (MTSCC) can be distinguished from papillary RCC with overlapping morphology by losses of chromosomes 1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, and 22. MTSCC with adverse histologic features shows frequent CDKN2A/2B (9p) deletions. BRAF mutations unify the metanephric family of tumors. The term "fumarate hydratase deficient RCC" ("FH-deficient RCC") is preferred over "hereditary leiomyomatosis and RCC syndrome-associated RCC". A low threshold for FH, 2SC, and SDHB immunohistochemistry is recommended in difficult to classify RCCs, particularly those with eosinophilic morphology, occurring in younger patients. Current evidence does not support existence of a unique tumor subtype occurring after chemotherapy/radiation in early childhood.

Co-existence of ESC-RCC, EVT, and LOT as synchronous and metachronous tumors in six patients with multifocal neoplasia but without clinical features of tuberous sclerosis complex

Renal cell tumors with oncocytic phenotypes represent a daily challenge, with several novel, emerging, and provisional entities enriching the diagnostic repertoire. Eosinophilic solid and cystic renal cell carcinoma (ESC-RCC), low-grade oncocytic tumor (LOT), and eosinophilic vacuolated tumor (EVT) have been recognized as unique entities, although their distinctive nature remains controversial. Although most of these tumors are sporadic, rare reports of similar tumors in tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) have been published. We describe multifocal, often bilateral, tumors in six patients without personal or family history of syndromic diseases. More than 60 tumors in various combinations were identified in 10 nephrectomies and one biopsy encompassing ESC-RCC (n = 6), LOT (n = 14), EVT (n = 1), clear cell RCC with fibromyomatous stroma (n = 12), clear cell RCC (n = 2), angiomyolipomas (AMLs; n > 20), unclassified renal cell tumors (n = 2), papillary adenomas (n = 4), and renomedullary interstitial cell tumor (n = 1). TSC1 germline pathogenic mutations were confirmed in two patients. A tumor without germline testing in a third patient revealed TSC1 biallelic inactivation. Two additional patients had molecular testing, which excluded common renal mutations and syndromes. We provide the first evidence of co-existence in the same organ and unequivocal relatedness of ESC-RCC, EVT, and LOT. End-stage renal disease was present in three of six patients with precursor lesions to all above tumors within adjacent renal parenchyma. In conclusion, identification of multifocal tumors with TSC-like morphology, especially in association with AMLs, could be the first manifestation of clinically silent TSC guiding clinical recommendations for further genetic testing and/or treatment recommendations.

Renal cell carcinoma associated with Xp11.2 translocation/transcription factor E3 gene fusion: an adult case report and literature review

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) associated with Xp11.2 translocation/transcription factor E3 (TFE3) gene fusion is a rare and independent subtype of RCC included in the classification of MiT (microphthalmia-associated transcriptional factor) family translocation RCC. Herein, we report an adult case of Xp11.2 translocation RCC, and review the relevant literature to improve our understanding of the pathogenesis, epidemiology, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, differential diagnosis, treatment, and other aspects of the disease.

Bioinformatic analysis identifying FGF1 gene as a new prognostic indicator in clear cell Renal Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) has been the commonest renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Although the disease classification, diagnosis and targeted therapy of RCC has been increasingly evolving attributing to the rapid development of current molecular pathology, the current clinical treatment situation is still challenging considering the comprehensive and progressively developing nature of malignant cancer. The study is to identify more potential responsible genes during the development of ccRCC using bioinformatic analysis, thus aiding more precise interpretation of the disease METHODS: Firstly, different cDNA expression profiles from Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) online database were used to screen the abnormal differently expressed genes (DEGs) between ccRCC and normal renal tissues. Then, based on the protein-protein interaction network (PPI) of all DEGs, the module analysis was performed to scale down the potential genes, and further survival analysis assisted our proceeding to the next step for selecting a credible key gene. Thirdly, immunohistochemistry (IHC) and quantitative real-time PCR (QPCR) were conducted to validate the expression change of the key gene in ccRCC comparing to normal tissues, meanwhile the prognostic value was verified using TCGA clinical data. Lastly, the potential biological function of the gene and signaling mechanism of gene regulating ccRCC development was preliminary explored.

RESULTS

Four cDNA expression profiles were picked from GEO database based on the number of containing sample cases, and a total of 192 DEGs, including 39 up-regulated and 153 down-regulated genes were shared in four profiles. Based on the DEGs PPI network, four function modules were identified highlighting a FGF1 gene involving PI3K-AKT signaling pathway which was shared in 3/4 modules. Further, both the IHC performed with ccRCC tissue microarray which contained 104 local samples and QPCR conducted using 30 different samples confirmed that FGF1 was aberrant lost in ccRCC. And Kaplan-Meier overall survival analysis revealed that FGF1 gene loss was related to worse ccRCC patients survival. Lastly, the pathological clinical features of FGF1 gene and the probable biological functions and signaling pathways it involved were analyzed using TCGA clinical data.

CONCLUSIONS

Using bioinformatic analysis, we revealed that FGF1 expression was aberrant lost in ccRCC which statistical significantly correlated with patients overall survival, and the gene's clinical features and potential biological functions were also explored. However, more detailed experiments and clinical trials are needed to support its potential drug-target role in clinical medical use.

Towards a new WHO classification of renal cell tumor: what the clinician needs to know-a narrative review

In 1952, renal cell carcinomas had been divided into 2 categories—clear cell or granular cell—depending upon their cytoplasmic staining characteristics. In the following years, the inventory of renal epithelial tumors has expanded by the addition of tumors named by their architectural pattern (i.e., papillary RCC, tubulocystic RCC), anatomic location (i.e., collecting duct carcinoma, renal medullary carcinoma), associated diseases (i.e., acquired cystic disease-associated RCCs). With the extensive application of molecular diagnostic techniques, it becomes possible to detect genetic distinctions between various types of renal neoplasm and discover new entities, otherwise misdiagnosed or diagnosed as unclassified RCC. Some tumors such as ALK rearrangement-associated RCC, MiT family translocation renal carcinomas, SDH-deficient renal cancer or FH-deficient RCC, are defined by their molecular characteristics. The most recent World Health Organization (WHO) classification of renal neoplasms account for more than 50 entities and provisional entities. New entities might be included in the upcoming WHO classification. The aim of this review is to summarise and discuss the newly acquired data and evidence on the clinical, pathological, molecular features and on the prognosis of new RCC entities, which will hopefully increase the awareness and the acceptance of these entities among clinicians and improve prognostication for individual patients.

Classification of renal cell tumors – current concepts and use of ancillary tests: recommendations of the Brazilian Society of Pathology

Classification of renal cell carcinomas has become more challenging. The 2016 WHO classification included 14 different subtypes and 4 emerging/provisional entities, and recent literature indicates new entities to be incorporated. Nomenclature is based on cytoplasmic appearance, architecture, combination of morphologies, anatomic location, underlying disease, familial syndromes, and specific genetic alterations. Immunohistochemistry is useful in selected cases while it can be insufficient in entities that require molecular confirmation of a specific gene alteration. The aim of these recommendations is to provide a reasonable and optimized approach for the use of ancillary tests in subtyping renal tumors, particularly in resource-limited settings.

Diagnostic approach in TFE3-rearranged renal cell carcinoma: a multi-institutional international survey

Transcription factor E3-rearranged renal cell carcinoma (TFE3-RCC) has heterogenous morphologic and immunohistochemical (IHC) features.131 pathologists with genitourinary expertise were invited in an online survey containing 23 questions assessing their experience on TFE3-RCC diagnostic work-up.Fifty (38%) participants completed the survey. 46 of 50 participants reported multiple patterns, most commonly papillary pattern (almost always 9/46, 19.5%; frequently 29/46, 63%). Large epithelioid cells with abundant cytoplasm were the most encountered cytologic feature, with either clear (almost always 10/50, 20%; frequently 34/50, 68%) or eosinophilic (almost always 4/49, 8%; frequently 28/49, 57%) cytology. Strong (3+) or diffuse (>75% of tumour cells) nuclear TFE3 IHC expression was considered diagnostic by 13/46 (28%) and 12/47 (26%) participants, respectively. Main TFE3 IHC issues were the low specificity (16/42, 38%), unreliable staining performance (15/42, 36%) and background staining (12/42, 29%). Most preferred IHC assays other than TFE3, cathepsin K and pancytokeratin were melan A (44/50, 88%), HMB45 (43/50, 86%), carbonic anhydrase IX (41/50, 82%) and CK7 (32/50, 64%). Cut-off for positive TFE3 fluorescent in situ hybridisation (FISH) was preferably 10% (9/50, 18%), although significant variation in cut-off values was present. 23/48 (48%) participants required TFE3 FISH testing to confirm TFE3-RCC regardless of the histomorphologic and IHC assessment. 28/50 (56%) participants would request additional molecular studies other than FISH assay in selected cases, whereas 3/50 participants use additional molecular cases in all cases when TFE3-RCC is in the differential.Optimal diagnostic approach on TFE3-RCC is impacted by IHC and/or FISH assay preferences as well as their conflicting interpretation methods.

[Molecular pathology of urogenital tumors : Recommendations from the 2019 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Consensus Conference]

Das zunehmende Verständnis molekularer Grundlagen von Tumoren sowie der Fortschritt in der Diversifizierung der onkologischen Therapien versprechen individualisierte Therapieoptionen, welche bislang jedoch nur ansatzweise in die Therapieplanung von urologischen Tumoren eingegangen sind. Daher hat die Internationale Gesellschaft für Urologische Pathologie (ISUP) im März 2019 eine Konsenskonferenz zur Erarbeitung evidenzbasierter Handlungsempfehlungen zur molekularpathologischen Diagnostik beim Urothelkarzinom, Nierenzellkarzinom, Prostatakarzinom, Peniskarzinom und testikulären Keimzelltumoren durchgeführt. Die auf dieser Konsenskonferenz erarbeiteten Empfehlungen sind kürzlich in 5 separaten Manuskripten veröffentlich worden und werden in der vorliegenden Arbeit zusammengefasst.

Im Rahmen der Konferenzvorbereitung wurde eine umfassende Umfrage zur derzeitigen Praxis molekularer Testungen bei urogenitalen Tumoren unter den Mitgliedern der ISUP durchgeführt. Auf der Konferenz wurden die Ergebnisse und die entsprechenden Hintergrundinformationen durch 5 Arbeitsgruppen präsentiert und Handlungsempfehlungen für die Diagnostik erarbeitet. Eine Übereinstimmung von 66 % der Konferenzteilnehmer wurde als Konsens definiert.

Clear cell papillary renal cell carcinoma: an update after 15 years

Fifteen years since the first recognition of clear cell papillary renal cell carcinoma, this distinct renal tumour type is now well accepted as a distinct entity in major classification schemes. It occurs both with and without end-stage renal disease and may be multifocal or bilateral in both scenarios. Recognisable morphological features include clear cells lining branching glands and variable papillary formations with nuclear alignment. Most tumours are small (pT1a) and nucleolar grade 1-2. Immunohistochemistry consistently shows positivity for carbonic anhydrase IX and cytokeratin 7, and often high molecular weight cytokeratin or GATA3, the latter suggesting distal nephron phenotype. Labeling for AMACR and CD10 is consistently negative or minimal. Despite a resemblance to clear cell renal cell carcinoma, molecular alterations of VHL and chromosome 3p are typically lacking, with debatable rare exceptions. Potential mimics include clear cell renal cell carcinoma (with branching architecture or nuclear alignment), papillary renal cell carcinoma with clear cytoplasm, or rarely MITF family translocation renal cell carcinoma. Clinical behaviour is highly favourable with rare, debatable reports of aggressive behaviour. Combined with striking similarity to several extrarenal benign neoplasms, it would be reasonable to reclassify this entity as a benign or low malignant potential neoplasm. Using the nomenclature of the extrarenal counterparts, clear cell papillary (cyst)adenoma is proposed.

The International Society of Urological Pathology Consultation on Molecular Pathology of Urogenital Cancer

The 2019 Consultation Conference on the molecular pathology of urogenital cancers was organized by the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) to have an understanding of the current use of molecular-genetic markers and to make recommendations on their application in prostate, bladder, renal, testicular, and penile cancer. This brief introductory article describes the organization of this conference and provides its rationale and main findings.

Renal Cell Tumors: Molecular Findings Reshaping Clinico-pathological Practice

Over the past 20 years, the number of subtypes of renal epithelial cell neoplasia has grown. This growth has resulted from detailed histological and immunohistochemical characterization of these tumors and their correlation with clinical outcomes. Distinctive molecular phenotypes have validated the unique nature of many of these tumors. This growth of unique renal neoplasms has continued after the 2016 World Health Organization (WHO) Classification of Tumours. A consequence is that both the pathologists who diagnose the tumors and the clinicians who care for these patients are confronted with a bewildering array of renal cell carcinoma variants. Many of these variants have important clinical features, i.e. familial or syndromic associations, genomics alterations that can be targeted with systemic therapy, and benignancy of tumors previously classified as carcinomas. Our goal in the review is to provide a practical guide to help recognize these variants, based on small and distinct sets of histological features and limited numbers of immunohistochemical stains, supplemented, as necessary, with molecular features.

Immunophenotypic and pathologic heterogeneity of unclassified renal cell carcinoma: a study of 300 cases

Renal cell carcinoma, unclassified (RCC-U), is a heterogenous group of tumors that do not fit in any of the recognized histologic types. Immunohistochemical studies are frequently used to characterize these tumors. Herein, we sought to investigate the immunophenotypes of 300 cases of RCC-U. The cases were morphologically classified into three groups: oncocytoma/chromophobe renal cell carcinoma-like, group 1; clear cell renal cell carcinoma-like, group 2; and others (ie, papillary renal cell carcinoma-like/collecting duct-like/pure sarcomatoid), group 3. The male-to-female ratio was 1.4. Most cases (168, 66%) were group 1. Group 3 was associated with larger tumor size, advanced stage, and frequent lymph node metastases. The most commonly used immunohistochemical stains were CK7 (n = 270; 89.5%), vimentin (n = 186, 82%), CD10 (n = 181; 59.9%), and AMACR (n = 162; 54%). Pancytokeratin (79/101; 78.2%) and PAX8 (54/61; 88.5%) were diffusely positive in most cases, followed by AMACR (69/117; 59%). CD117 was positive in 53 of 118 cases (45%). RCC-U is a morphologically and immunophenotypically heterogenous group of tumors, and comprehensive workup is needed before rendering the diagnosis.

Sclerosing TSC1 mutated renal cell carcinoma: An unusual pattern mimicking MITF family translocation renal cell carcinoma

The tuberous sclerosis genes and MTOR are increasingly being found to have important roles in novel subtypes of renal cancer, particularly emerging entities eosinophilic solid and cystic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and high-grade oncocytic renal tumor (HOT)/RCC with eosinophilic and vacuolated cytoplasm. We report a unique renal neoplasm in a 66-year-old woman that initially mimicked MITF family translocation RCC due to mixed clear and eosinophilic cells, extensive stromal hyalinization, and psammoma bodies, yet which was negative for TFE3 and TFEB fluorescence in situ hybridization and a next generation sequencing (NGS) gene fusion assay. Cytoplasmic stippling triggered consideration of TSC-associated neoplasms, and a targeted NGS assay revealed a variant in exon 21 of TSC1 resulting in c.2626G>T p.(Glu876*) truncating mutation. This report adds to the morphologic spectrum of TSC-related renal neoplasms, including prominent stromal hyalinization as a potentially deceptive pattern. Due to the overlap in cytoplasmic stippling between eosinophilic solid and cystic RCC and HOT/RCC with eosinophilic and vacuolated cytoplasm, it is debatable which category this example would best fit. Further understanding of these entities and other renal neoplasms with alterations in the TSC genes will elucidate whether they should be considered a family of tumors.