Renal cell carcinoma with t(X;17)(p11.2;q25) in a 6-year-old Taiwanese boy

Clinical heterogeneity of Xp11 translocation renal cell carcinoma: impact of fusion subtype, age, and stage

Xp11 translocation renal cell carcinomas harbor chromosome translocations involving the Xp11 breakpoint, resulting in gene fusions involving the TFE3 gene. The most common subtypes are the ASPSCR1-TFE3 renal cell carcinomas resulting from t(X;17)(p11;q25) translocation, and the PRCC-TFE3 renal cell carcinomas, resulting from t(X;1)(p11;q21) translocation. A formal clinical comparison of these two subtypes of Xp11 translocation renal cell carcinomas has not been performed. We report one new genetically confirmed Xp11 translocation renal cell carcinoma of each type. We also reviewed the literature for all published cases of ASPSCR1-TFE3 and PRCC-TFE3 renal cell carcinomas and contacted all corresponding authors to obtain or update the published follow-up information. Study of two new, unpublished cases, and review of the literature revealed that 8/8 patients who presented with distant metastasis had ASPSCR1-TFE3 renal cell carcinomas, and all but one of these patients either died of disease or had progressive disease. Regional lymph nodes were involved by metastasis in 24 of the 32 ASPSCR1-TFE3 cases in which nodes were resected, compared with 5 of 14 PRCC-TFE3 cases (P=0.02).; however, 11 of 13 evaluable patients with ASPSCR1-TFE3 renal cell carcinomas who presented with N1M0 disease remained disease free. Two PRCC-TFE3 renal cell carcinomas recurred late (at 20 and 30 years, respectively). In multivariate analysis, only older age or advanced stage at presentation (not fusion subtype) predicted death. In conclusion, ASPSCR1-TFE3 renal cell carcinomas are more likely to present at advanced stage (particularly node-positive disease) than are PRCC-TFE3 renal cell carcinomas. Although systemic metastases portend a grim prognosis, regional lymph node involvement does not, at least in short-term follow-up. The tendency for PRCC-TFE3 renal cell carcinomas to recur late warrants long-term follow-up.

TFE3 break-apart FISH has a higher sensitivity for Xp11.2 translocation-associated renal cell carcinoma compared with TFE3 or cathepsin K immunohistochemical staining alone: expanding the morphologic spectrum

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) associated with Xp11.2 translocation is uncommon, characterized by several different translocations involving the TFE3 gene. We assessed the utility of break-apart fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) in establishing the diagnosis for suspected or unclassified cases with negative or equivocal TFE3 immunostaining by analyzing 24 renal cancers with break-apart TFE3 FISH and comparing the molecular findings with the results of TFE3 and cathepsin K immunostaining in the same tumors. Ten tumors were originally diagnosed as Xp11.2 RCC on the basis of positive TFE3 immunostaining, and 14 were originally considered unclassified RCCs with negative or equivocal TFE3 staining, but with a range of features suspicious for Xp11.2 RCC. Seventeen cases showed TFE3 rearrangement associated with Xp11.2 translocation by FISH, including all 13 tumors with moderate or strong TFE3 (n=10) or cathepsin K (n=7) immunoreactivity. FISH-positive cases showed negative or equivocal immunoreactivity for TFE3 or cathepsin K in 7 and 10 tumors, respectively (both=3). None had positive immunohistochemistry but negative FISH. Morphologic features were typical for Xp11.2 RCC in 10/17 tumors. Unusual features included 1 melanotic Xp11.2 renal cancer, 1 tumor with mixed features of Xp11.2 RCC and clear cell RCC, and other tumors mimicking clear cell RCC, multilocular cystic RCC, or high-grade urothelial carcinoma. Morphology mimicking high-grade urothelial carcinoma has not been previously reported in these tumors. Psammoma bodies, hyalinized stroma, and intracellular pigment were preferentially identified in FISH-positive cases compared with FISH-negative cases. Our results support the clinical application of a TFE3 break-apart FISH assay for diagnosis and confirmation of Xp11.2 RCC and further expand the histopathologic spectrum of these neoplasms to include tumors with unusual features. A renal tumor with pathologic or clinical features highly suggestive of translocation-associated RCC but exhibiting negative or equivocal TFE3 immunostaining should be evaluated by TFE3 FISH assay to fully assess this possibility.

Renal translocation carcinomas: clinicopathologic, immunohistochemical, and gene expression profiling analysis of 31 cases with a review of the literature

We report clinicopathologic features of a large series of renal translocation carcinomas from a multicentric study. Diagnosis was performed by cytogenetic examination of fresh material and/or by immunochemistry with antibodies directed against the C-terminal part of transcription factor E3 (TFE3) and native transcription factor EB (TFEB) proteins. Clinical data, follow-up, and histologic features were assessed. Antibodies against CK7, CD10, vimentin, epithelial membrane antigen, AE1-AE3, E-cadherin, alpha-methylacyl-coenzyme A racemase, melan A, and HMB45 were tested on tissue microarrays. Whole-genome microarray expression profiling was performed on 4 tumors. Twenty-nine cases were diagnosed as TFE3 and 2 as TFEB renal translocation carcinomas, including 13 males and 18 females, mean age 24.6 years. Two patients had a previous history of chemotherapy and 1 had a history of renal failure. Mean size of the tumor was 6.9 cm. Thirteen cases were > or = pT3 stage. Twelve cases were N+ or M+. Mean follow-up was 29.5 months. Three patients presented metastases and 5 have died. Mixed papillary and nested patterns with clear and/or eosinophilic cells represented the most consistent histologic appearance, with common foci of calcifications regardless of the type of translocation. Using a 30 mn incubation at room temperature, TFE3 immunostainings were positive in only 82% of our TFE3 translocation carcinomas. Both TFE3 and TFEB renal translocation carcinomas expressed CD10 and alpha-methylacyl-coenzyme A racemase in all cases. An expression of E-cadherin was observed in two-third of cases. Cytokeratins were expressed in less than one-third of cases. Melanocytic markers were expressed at least weakly in all cases except two. Unsupervised clustering on the basis of the gene expression profiling indicated a distinct subgroup of tumors. TRIM 63 glutathione S-transferase A1 and alanyl aminopeptidase are the main differentially expressed genes for this group of tumors. Our results suggest that these differentially expressed genes may serve as novel diagnostic or prognostic markers.