Expanding the morphologic spectrum of chromophobe renal cell carcinoma: A study of 8 cases with papillary architecture

Chromophobe Renal Cell Carcinoma With Extensive Retraction Artifact: A Potential Diagnostic Pitfall From Micropapillary Urothelial Carcinoma

In addition to "classic" and eosinophilic subtype, chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is well-known to demonstrate various morphological patterns including adenomatoid, microcystic, pigmented, multicystic, papillary, neuroendocrine-like, and small cell-like, all of which are important to appreciate for accurate diagnosis. Herein, we expand on a unique chromophobe RCC morphology not previously described consisting of tumor cells with extensive stromal retraction, mimicking upper urothelial tract micropapillary carcinoma (MPC). Twelve MPC-like chromophobe RCC nephrectomies were reviewed with clinicopathological features recorded; molecular testing was performed on 7 of 12 tumors. Patients were mostly men (n=10) with a mean age of 65 years. Mean tumor size was 6.4 cm with pathological stage distribution as follows: 4 (33%) T1a, 2 (17%) T1b, 1 (8%) T2b, and 3 (25%) T3a. The extent of MPC-like chromophobe RCC foci ranged from 10% to 40% (mean=26%; there was no correlation between the extent of MPC-like chromophobe RCC foci and tumor stage). Other chromophobe RCC morphological patterns were not identified. When performed, all (100%) tumors depicted prototypic chromophobe RCC staining pattern of KIT positivity/KRT7 positivity. Molecular showed 6 of 7 (86%) with multiple chromosomal losses. Clinically significant mutations were identified in NF1, TP53, FLCN (likely somatic), CHEK2, and ZFHX3 genes. Follow up available in 9 patients showed no evidence of disease (mean=23 months). Although the etiology behind the extensive stromal retraction in our tumors is unknown, this may likely be artifactual in nature. Nonetheless, it is important to include MPC-like chromophobe RCC in the spectrum of "variant" morphologies to avoid diagnostic pitfalls from micropapillary carcinoma.

How New Developments Impact Diagnosis in Existing Renal Neoplasms

In recent years, several emerging diagnostic entities have been described in renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, our understanding of well-known and established entities has also grown. Clear cell papillary RCC is now relabeled as a tumor rather than carcinoma in view of its nonaggressive behavior. Renal tumors with a predominantly infiltrative pattern are very important for recognition, as most of these have aggressive behavior, including fumarate hydratase-deficient RCC, SMARCB1-deficient medullary carcinoma, collecting duct carcinoma, urothelial carcinoma, and metastases from other cancers.

Tumors masquerading as type 2 papillary renal cell carcinoma: pathologists' ever-expanding differential diagnosis for a heterogeneous group of entities

Although papillary renal cell carcinoma has historically been classified as either type 1 or type 2, data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) has demonstrated significant genomic heterogeneity in tumors classified as "type 2 papillary renal cell carcinoma" (T2PRCC). Papillary renal cell carcinoma is expected to have a favorable clinical course compared to clear cell renal cell carcinoma (CCRCC). However, tumors with poor outcome more similar to CCRCC were included in the T2PRCC cohort studied by the TCGA. The differential diagnosis for T2PRCC includes a variety of other renal tumors, including aggressive entities such as TFE3 translocation-associated renal cell carcinoma, TFEB-amplified renal cell carcinoma, fumarate hydratase-deficient renal cell carcinoma, high-grade CCRCC, and collecting duct carcinoma. Accurate classification of these tumors is important for prognostication and selection of therapy.

Contemporary Clinical Definitions, Differential Diagnosis, and Novel Predictive Tools for Renal Cell Carcinoma

Despite significant progress regarding clinical detection/imaging evaluation modalities and genetic/molecular characterization of pathogenesis, advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remains an incurable disease and overall RCC mortality has been steadily rising for decades. Concomitantly, clinical definitions have been greatly nuanced and refined. RCCs are currently viewed as a heterogeneous series of cancers, with the same anatomical origin, but fundamentally different metabolisms and clinical behaviors. Thus, RCC pathological diagnosis/subtyping guidelines have become increasingly intricate and cumbersome, routinely requiring ancillary studies, mainly immunohistochemistry. Meanwhile, RCC-associated-antigen targeted systemic therapy has been greatly diversified and emerging, novel clinical applications for RCC immunotherapy have already reported significant survival benefits, at least in the adjuvant setting. Even so, systemically disseminated RCCs still associate very poor clinical outcomes, with currently available therapeutic modalities only being able to prolong survival. In lack of a definitive cure for advanced RCCs, integration of the amounting scientific knowledge regarding RCC pathogenesis into RCC clinical management has been paramount for improving patient outcomes. The current review aims to offer an integrative perspective regarding contemporary RCC clinical definitions, proper RCC clinical work-up at initial diagnosis (semiology and multimodal imaging), RCC pathological evaluation, differential diagnosis/subtyping protocols, and novel clinical tools for RCC screening, risk stratification and therapeutic response prediction.

Algorithm-Based Approach to the Histological Routine Diagnosis of Renal Oncocytic Tumors in Core Biopsy Specimens

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

A growing number of tumor entities with badly defined limits are enlarging in the last years the family of oncocytic tumors in the kidney.

RECENT FINDINGS

Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (ChRCC) and renal oncocytoma (RO) are classically well-known tumors, but the borderland between them, and their precise connection, remains a matter of debate. Aside from that, other emerging and provisional entities, like eosinophilic solid and cystic renal cell carcinoma (ESC RCC), eosinophilic vacuolated tumor (EVT), low-grade oncocytic tumor (LOT), and papillary renal neoplasm with reverse polarity (PRRP), have been recently described. This spectrum of tumors remains a diagnostic challenge in renal pathology, especially if the specimen obtained is scarce. This review focuses on practical diagnostic problems when managing core biopsies and proposes a diagnostic algorithm maximizing the information provided by both morphology and immunohistochemistry. So, a combination of morphologic features on hematoxylin-eosin and six antibodies (CK7, CD117, CK20, CD10, GATA-3, and cathepsin K) is advised to be used in a stepwise fashion.

Low grade oncocytic tumors of the kidney: a clinically relevant approach for the workup and accurate diagnosis

Renal oncocytoma and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma were accepted as unique renal tumors in the late 1990s. Since their formal description, criteria for diagnosis have evolved and additional distinct tumor subtypes originally considered as one these two entities are now recognized. The last two decades have witnessed unprecedented interest in the spectrum of low grade oncocytic renal neoplasms in three specific areas: (1) histologic characterization of tumors with overlapping morphologic features between oncocytoma and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma; (2) description of potentially unique entities within this spectrum, such as eosinophilic vacuolated tumor and low-grade oncocytic tumor; and (3) better appreciation of the association between a subset of low grade oncocytic tumors and hereditary renal neoplasia. While this important work has been academically rewarding, the proposal of several histologic entities with overlapping morphologic and immunophenotypic features (which may require esoteric adjunctive immunohistochemical and/or molecular techniques for confirmation) has created frustration in the diagnostic pathology and urology community as information evolves regarding classification within this spectrum of renal neoplasia. Pathologists, including genitourinary subspecialists, are often uncertain as to the "best practice" diagnostic approach to such tumors. In this review, we present a practical clinically relevant algorithmic approach to classifying tumors within the low grade oncocytic family of renal neoplasia, including a proposal for compressing terminology for evolving categories where appropriate without sacrificing prognostic relevance.

WHO 2022 landscape of papillary and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma

The 5th edition of the WHO Classification of Tumours of the Urinary and Male Genital Systems contains relevant revisions and introduces a group of molecularly defined renal tumour subtypes. Herein we present the World Health Organization (WHO) 2022 perspectives on papillary and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma with emphasis on their evolving classification, differential diagnosis, and emerging entities. The WHO 2022 classification eliminated the type 1/2 papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC) subcategorization, given the recognition of frequent mixed tumour phenotypes and the existence of entities with a different molecular background within the type 2 pRCC category. Additionally, emerging entities such as biphasic squamoid alveolar RCC, biphasic hyalinising psammomatous RCC, papillary renal neoplasm with reverse polarity, and Warthin-like pRCC are included as part of the pRCC spectrum, while additional morphological and molecular data are being gathered. In addition to oncocytomas and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (chRCC), a category of 'other oncocytic tumours' with oncocytoma/chRCC-like features has been introduced, including emerging entities, most with TSC/mTOR pathway alterations (eosinophilic vacuolated tumour and so-called 'low-grade' oncocytic tumour), deserving additional research. Eosinophilic solid and cystic RCC was accepted as a new and independent tumour entity. Finally, a highly reproducible and clinically relevant universal grading system for chRCC is still missing and is another niche of ongoing investigation. This review discusses these developments and highlights emerging morphological and molecular data relevant for the classification of renal cell carcinoma.

The Histologic Diversity of Chromophobe Renal Cell Carcinoma With Emphasis on Challenges Encountered in Daily Practice

Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (ChRCC) is the third most common renal cell carcinoma in adults. The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview highlighting the broad morphologic spectrum of ChRCC, and offer a practical approach for handling cases in daily practice. For the purpose of this review, we classify ChRCC subtypes as (1) classic, (2) eosinophilic, (3) sarcomatoid, and (4) other rare patterns. The concept of eosinophilic ChRCC has significantly evolved, yet it still is one of the major diagnostic challenges pathologists face in routine practice due to its morphologic overlap with renal oncocytoma. Rare patterns of ChRCC have been described over the last few decades, showing a wide histologic spectrum including those with adenomatoid microcystic pigmented, multicystic, neuroendocrine, small cell, and papillary features. ChRCC represents a heterogenous group of neoplasms, demonstrating varied but unique morphologic and genetic profiles. Although the field of ChRCC knowledge is still evolving, rare patterns can present diagnostic challenges if they are not known to pathologists and/or clinicians. Proper and generous tumor sampling along with careful histologic examination allow for recognition of these rare morphologies. The role of routine molecular testing appears to be limited. From a clinical management standpoint, the rare patterns of ChRCC seem to have no definite clinical implications at present and likely can be managed similarly to usual ChRCC. Finally, we will discuss distinctive novel/emerging renal neoplasms previously considered under the spectrum of ChRCC, low-grade oncocytic renal tumor and eosinophilic vacuolated tumor, with regard to their current significance and implications for future classification strategies.

Development and Validation of a Competitive Risk Model in Elderly Patients With Chromophobe Cell Renal Carcinoma: A Population-Based Study

Background

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the most common renal malignancy in adults, and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (chRCC) is the third most common subtype of RCC. We aimed to construct a competitive risk model to predict cancer-specific survival (CSS) in elderly patients with chRCC.

Methods

The clinicopathological information of the patients was downloaded from the SEER database, and the patients were randomly divided into the training and validation cohorts. Patients' risk factors for cancer-specific death (CSM) were analyzed using proportional subdistribution hazard (SH). We constructed a competitive risk model to predict the CSS of elderly chRCC patients. Consistency index (C-index), the area under receiver operating curve (AUC), and a calibration curve were used to validate the model's accuracy. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was used to test the clinical value of the model.

Results

A total of 3,522 elderly patients with chRCC were included in the analysis. Patients were randomly assigned to either the training cohort (N = 2,474) or the validation cohort (N = 1,048). SH analysis found that age, race, T, N, and M stage, tumor size, and surgery were risk factors for CSM. We constructed a competitive risk model to predict patients' CSS. In the training set, the model predicted patients' 1-, 3-, and 5-year CSS with C-indices of 82.2, 80.8, and 78.2, respectively. The model predicted patient 1-, 3-, and 5-year CSS in the validation cohort with C-indices of 84.7, 83.4, and 76.9, respectively. The calibration curve showed that the model's predicted value is almost consistent with the observed value, which indicated that the model has good accuracy. The AUC of the training set and validation queue also suggested that the model has good discrimination. The clinical utility of the DCA model in predicting patients' CSS is higher than that of traditional TNM staging.

Conclusions

We constructed a competitive risk model to predict CSS in elderly patients with chRCC. The model has good accuracy and reliability, which can help doctors and patients to make clinical decisions and follow-up strategies.

The Morphological Spectrum of Papillary Renal Cell Carcinoma and Prevalence of Provisional/Emerging Renal Tumor Entities with Papillary Growth

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) represents a heterogeneous disease, encompassing an increasing number of tumor subtypes. Post-2016, the World Health Organization (WHO) classification recognized that the spectrum of papillary renal cell carcinoma is evolving and has long surpassed the dichotomic simplistic "type 1 versus type 2" classification. The differential diagnosis of pRCC includes several new provisional/emerging entities with papillary growth. Type 2 tumors have been cleared out of several confounding entities, now regarded as independent tumors with specific clinical and molecular backgrounds. In this work we describe the prevalence and characteristics of emerging papillary tumor entities in two renal tumor cohorts (one consisting of consecutive papillary tumors from a single institute, the other consisting of consultation cases from several centers). After a review of 154 consecutive pRCC cases, 58% remained type 1 pRCC, and 34% type 2 pRCC. Papillary renal neoplasm with reversed polarity (1.3%), biphasic hyalinizing psammomatous RCC (1.3%), and biphasic squamoid/alveolar RCC (4.5%) were rare. Among 281 consultation cases, 121 (43%) tumors had a dominant papillary growth (most frequently MiT family translocation RCCs, mucinous tubular and spindle cell carcinoma and clear cell papillary RCC). Our data confirm that the spectrum of RCCs with papillary growth represents a major diagnostical challenge, frequently requiring a second expert opinion. Papillary renal neoplasm with reversed polarity, biphasic hyalinizing psammomatous RCC, and biphasic squamoid/alveolar RCC are rarely sent out for a second opinion, but correct classification and knowledge of these variants will improve our understanding of the clinical behavior of renal tumors with papillary growth.

[Oncocytic tumours of the kidney-new differential diagnoses]

BACKGROUND

Recent developments in differential diagnosis have led to new knowledge about oncocytic renal neoplasms.

OBJECTIVES

Overview of differential diagnosis of oncocytic tumours.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a literature search on oncocytic renal tumours and mapped known tumour types. Possible differential diagnoses are discussed.

RESULTS

Besides the tumour types already acknowledged by the 2016 WHO classification, there is new evidence regarding the group of hard-to-classify oncocytic neoplasms. Findings point to immunohistochemical and molecular characteristics that may lead to the establishment of new entities in the future. In addition, important differential diagnosis can now be identified, facilitating specific therapies for oncocytic renal tumours.

CONCLUSION

A correct diagnosis of oncocytic renal tumours not only improves prognostic assessment (and, if necessary, specific therapies) but is also clinically relevant regarding a possible association with hereditary tumour syndromes.

Renal cell carcinomas with tubulopapillary architecture and oncocytic cells: Molecular analysis of 39 difficult tumors to classify

So-called oncocytic papillary renal cell carcinoma (OPRCC) is a poorly defined variant of papillary renal cell carcinoma. Since its first description, several studies were published with conflicting results, and thus precise definition is lacking. A cohort of 39 PRCCs composed of oncocytic cells were analyzed. Cases were divided into 3 groups based on copy number variation (CNV) pattern. The first group consisted of 23 cases with CNV equal to renal oncocytoma. The second group consisted of 7 cases with polysomy of chromosomes 7 and 17 and the last group of 9 cases included those with variable CNV. Epidemiologic, morphologic and immunohistochemical features varied among the groups. There were not any particular histomorphologic features correlating with any of the genetic subgroups. Further, a combination of morphologic, immunohistochemical, and molecular-genetic features did not allow to precisely predict biologic behavior. Owing to variable CNV pattern in OPRCC, strict adherence to morphology and immunohistochemical profile is recommended, particularly in limited samples (i.e., core biopsy). Applying CNV pattern as a part of a diagnostic algorithm can be potentially misleading. OPRCC is a highly variable group of tumors, which might be misdiagnosed as renal oncocytoma. Using the term OPRCC as a distinct diagnostic entity is, thanks to its high heterogeneity, questionable.

Factors Associated with Survival From Xp11.2 Translocation Renal Cell Carcinoma Diagnosis-A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis

Purpose: Xp11.2 translocation renal cell carcinoma (Xp11.2 tRCC) is a rare subtype of renal cell carcinoma (RCC), characterized by translocations of Xp11.2 breakpoints, involving of the transcription factor three gene (TFE3). The aim of our study was to comprehensively characterize the clinical characteristics and outcomes, and to identify risk factors associated with OS and PFS in Xp11.2 tRCC patients.

Methods: Literature search on Xp11.2 tRCC was performed using databases such as pubmed EMBASE and Web of Science. Studies were eligible if outcomes data (OS and/or PFS) were reported for patients with a histopathologically confirmed Xp11.2 tRCC. PFS and OS were evaluated using the univariable and multivariable Cox regression model.

Results: There were 80 eligible publications, contributing 415 patients. In multivariable analyses, the T stage at presentation was significantly associated with PFS (HR: 3.87; 95% CI: 1.70 to 8.84; p = 0.001). The median time of PFS was 72 months. In the multivariable analyses, age at diagnosis (HR: 2.16; 95% CI: 1.03 to 4.50; p = 0.041), T stage at presentation (HR: 4.44; 95% CI: 2.16 to 9.09; p < 0.001) and metastasis status at presentation (HR: 2.67; 95% CI: 1.12 to 6.41; p = 0.027) were all associated with OS, with a median follow-up time of 198 months.

Conclusion: T stage at presentation is the only factor that is associated with both PFS and OS in patients with Xp11.2 tRCC. Also, patients over 45 or with metastases are more likely to have poorer OS.

Cathepsin K (Clone EPR19992) Demonstrates Uniformly Positive Immunoreactivity in Renal Oncocytoma, Chromophobe Renal Cell Carcinoma, and Distal Tubules

Introduction. Cathepsin K is overexpressed in several tumors associated with microphthalmia transcription factor (MiTF) family or mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) upregulation. Among renal neoplasms, MiTF translocation renal cell carcinoma (RCC), perivascular epithelioid cell neoplasms (PEComa), and eosinophilic solid and cystic RCC have demonstrated Cathepsin K immunoreactivity. In this study, we demonstrate a uniform Cathepsin K expression in oncocytoma, chromophobe RCC (CHRCC), and distal tubules. Design. We stained 13 oncocytomas, 13 CHRCC, 14 clear cell RCC (CCRCC), 9 papillary RCC (PRCC), 9 PEComas, and 5 MiTF RCC. Additionally, we assessed immunoreactivity for Cathepsin K in non-neoplastic renal parenchyma. Immunolabeling was performed on regularly charged slides from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue with monoclonal anti-rabbit antibodies to human Cathepsin K (clone EPR19992, Abcam). Results. All oncocytomas demonstrated diffuse strong cytoplasmic immunolabeling. CHRCC demonstrated uniform less intense immunolabeling in all cases with membranous accentuation. The assessment of the non-neoplastic renal parenchyma in all cases showed strong cytoplasmic immunoreaction in distal tubules and proximal tubules stained faintly. Mesangial cells were not immunoreactive. All MiTF RCC and PEComas were immunoreactive for Cathepsin K, whereas CCRCC and PRCC were negative in all cases. Conclusions. In this study, we expand the spectrum of renal neoplasms reactive with a particular clone of Cathepsin K (EPR19992). Distal tubules are strongly immunoreactive for Cathepsin K. Our conclusions need to be taken into consideration when differential diagnosis includes MiTF RCC or PEComa and this Cathepsin K clone is included in the immunohistochemical panel. This newer antibody clone was not tested in prior publications, potentially explaining the difference in conclusions.

Comprehensive Review of Numerical Chromosomal Aberrations in Chromophobe Renal Cell Carcinoma Including Its Variant Morphologies

Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (ChRCC) accounts for 5% to 7% of all renal cell carcinomas. It was thought for many years that ChRCC exhibits a hypodiploid genome. Recent studies using advanced molecular genetics techniques have shown more complex and heterogenous pattern with frequent chromosomal gains. Historically, multiple losses of chromosomes 1, 2, 6, 10, 13, 17, and 21 have been considered a genetic hallmark of ChRCC, both for classic and eosinophilic ChRCC variants. In the last 2 decades, multiple chromosomal gains in ChRCCs have also been documented, depicting a considerably broader genetic spectrum than previously thought. Studies of rare morphologic variants including ChRCC with pigmented microcystic adenomatoid/multicystic growth, ChRCC with neuroendocrine differentiation, ChRCC with papillary architecture, and renal oncocytoma-like variants also showed variable chromosomal numerical aberrations, including multiple losses (common), gains (less common), or chromosomal changes overlapping with renal oncocytoma. Although not the focus of the review, The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) data in ChRCC show TP53, PTEN, and CDKN2A to be the most mutated genes. Given the complexity of molecular genetic alterations in ChRCC, this review analyzed the existing published data, aiming to present a comprehensive up-to-date survey of the chromosomal abnormalities in classic ChRCC and its variants. The potential role of chromosomal numerical aberrations in the differential diagnostic evaluation may be limited, potentially owing to its high variability.

Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma: current and controversial issues

It has been 35 years since Professor Thoenes and his colleagues discovered chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Since then, our knowledge about this tumour entity has changed and novel tumour entities have been discovered. The aim of this review is to discuss recent molecular findings and open questions in diagnosing chromophobe-like/oncocytic neoplasms. The broader differential diagnosis of chromophobe-like and oncocytoma-like neoplasms includes SDH-deficient renal cell carcinoma, fumarate hydratase (FH) deficient RCC, epitheloid angiomyolipoma ('oncocytoma like'), MiT family translocation RCC and the emerging entity of eosinophilic solid and cystic renal cell carcinoma. After separation of these tumours from chromophobe RCC, it becomes evident that chromophobe RCC are low malignant tumours with a 5-6% risk of metastasis. Recent next generation sequencing (NGS) and DNA methylation profiling studies have confirmed Thoenes' theory of a distal tubule derived origin of chromophobe RCC and renal oncocytomas. Comprehensive genomic analyses of chromophobe RCC have demonstrated a low somatic mutation rate and identified TP53 and PTEN as the most frequently mutated genes, whereas 'unclassified' RCC with oncocytic or chromophobe-like features can show somatic inactivating mutations of TSC2 or activating mutations of MTOR as the primary molecular alterations. For the future, it would be desirable to create a category of 'oncocytic/chromophobe RCC, NOS' with the potential of further molecular studies for identification of TSC1/2 mutations in these rare tumours.

Biphasic Squamoid Alveolar Renal Cell Carcinoma of the Kidney Involved by Atypical CD5-Positive B-Cells

Biphasic squamoid alveolar renal cell carcinoma (BSARCC) is a recently described kidney cancer entity with <60 published cases so far. Some unique features of BSARCC include distinct squamoid and alveolar morphology forming glomeruloid configurations and 2 types of tumor cells with different immunoprofiles. Although the mechanism is unknown, neutrophils and cellular materials engulfed by larger tumor cells (described as "emperipolesis") are observed in all reported cases including the current one. In this article, we report a case of a 70-year-old man who presented with an incidental renal mass during workup for immunoglobulin M monoclonal gammopathy of unknown significance and cold agglutinin autoimmune hemolytic anemia. A detailed pathologic evaluation and immunohistochemical studies revealed BSARCC colliding with atypical CD5+ monoclonal B-cells.

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.

Detection of tetraploidization in chromophobe renal cell carcinoma: Insights and pitfalls

Chromosomal losses resulting in a marked hypodiploidy are a specificity of chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (ChRCC), the third most frequent type of kidney cancer. Its detection is useful in challenging cases. However some ChRCC, especially the eosinophilic variant, do not exhibit hypodiploidy and deserve to be better explored. Using comparative genomic hybridization (array-CGH) we observed chromosomal gains in five cases of nonmetastatic ChRCC. Our objective was to determine whether these apparent chromosomal gains were instead losses within a near-polyploid genome. We performed a retrospective and prospective molecular study of 26 cases of ChRCC retrieved among 643 renal tumors (2012-2019). All tumors were analyzed using array-CGH (Agilent) and array-CGH (Affymetrix) coupled to single nucleotide polymorphism analysis (array-SNP). In silico manual centralization of the fluorescence ratio, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and next generation sequencing were made in the five cases suspected of polyploidy. Tetraploidization was observed in 19% of our series of ChRCC. None of the methods used individually could identify both chromosomal losses and tetraploidy. Only the combination of manual recentring of array-CGH and FISH provided relevant results. B-allele frequency results indicated that tetraploidization occurred secondarily to chromosomal losses in four cases while it preceded losses in one case. Tetraploidization is a frequent but underestimated phenomenon in ChRCC that may be overlooked using the individual standard genomic methods. Its potential clinical consequences are not identified yet. Whether the mechanisms that induce chromosomal losses in ChRCC are the same that generate tetraploidization is not known.