Expression of Renal Cell Carcinoma Antigen (RCC) in Renal Epithelial and Nonrenal Tumors

Possible Ovarian and Peritoneal Carcinoma Presenting in a Mediastinal Lymph Node and Pleural Effusion: A Case Report and Review of the Literature

Ovarian carcinoma often doesn't show noticeable symptoms and is frequently diagnosed at an advanced stage. It is the most fatal cancer within the gynecologic system. Our understanding of ovarian pathology is limited, necessitating the use of multiple markers to accurately detect ovarian cancer, particularly when it presents abnormally, such as in pleural effusion or lymph nodes. A 45-year-old woman presented to the emergency room (ER) due to abdominal pain lasting for two weeks. A computed tomography (CT) scan revealed peritoneal carcinomatosis accompanied by ascites and calcification in the lymph nodes. The likely primary sources were determined to be mucinous adenocarcinomas from either the colon or ovary. Following the CT findings, a fine needle aspiration was conducted on a perigastric lymph node. Histopathology results indicated a "poorly differentiated carcinoma [with] malignant cells present." Subsequently, a PowerPort was inserted, and adjuvant chemotherapy commenced two days later, utilizing a combination of carboplatin, bevacizumab, and paclitaxel. Paracentesis was performed, yielding clear-yellow fluid. However, abdominal fullness gradually increased again after paracentesis. The patient began experiencing more intense abdominal pain, particularly in the left lower quadrant. Surgical exploration revealed widespread disease involvement throughout the intestines. Our patient exhibited an atypical manifestation of ovarian carcinoma, challenging its identification due to ectopic foci and the absence of many distinctly identifiable markers. Through comprehensive testing and a process of elimination, we successfully differentiated ovarian carcinoma from other potential cancers. The conclusive histopathological report, along with a markedly elevated CA-125 level, provided substantial support for the probable final diagnosis of ovarian carcinoma. Despite numerous advancements in staining and identification techniques, the diagnosis of ovarian carcinoma remains inadequately understood. Identifying ovarian carcinoma without clear visualization is often challenging, and further research is warranted to enhance our understanding of pathological methods. Moreover, there is a need to prioritize the development and exploration of ovarian carcinoma screening and testing methods to prevent delayed disease detection.

A Rare Case of Cutaneous Metastasis of Renal Cell Carcinoma to the Lateral Thigh

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is a common cancer type in the United States, and at the time of diagnosis, many patients already have metastatic disease. RCC typically metastasizes to the lungs, liver, and bones, with few cases manifesting cutaneous metastasis. Most incidences of RCC metastases reported in the literature have been on the face and scalp. We discuss a case of a 64-year-old male patient who presented with a history of RCC and a purpuric nodule on his lateral thigh. Histopathological examination revealed vacuolated cytoplasm with areas of cytoplasmic clearing; the cells stained positively for cytokeratin AE1/AE3, CAM5.2, and PAX8. Cutaneous metastatic RCC was subsequently diagnosed. Cutaneous manifestations of RCC, particularly to the thigh, remain a rare presentation of metastatic RCC.

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.

Immunohistochemistry for the diagnosis of renal epithelial neoplasms

Despite the increasing number of newly identified renal neoplasms, the diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) can usually be reached with careful histologic examination and a limited immunohistochemical (IHC) panel. Clear cell, papillary, chromophobe RCC and oncocytoma account for more than 90% of renal neoplasia in adults, and sophisticated ancillary tools are usually unnecessary. Renal tumors with entity-defining genetic alterations may ultimately require molecular confirmation via cytogenetics or sequencing technologies, such as RCC with TFE3, TFEB, or ALK gene rearrangements, or TFEB amplified RCC. In fumarate hydratase-deficient and succinate dehydrogenase-deficient RCC, highly specific IHC markers can strongly suggest the diagnosis. In the metastatic setting, PAX8 and carbonic anhydrase 9 are among the most helpful markers for confirming RCC and clear cell type, respectively; however, caution should be exercised in the absence of a current or historical renal mass. In diagnostically challenging cases, such as renal eosinophilic tumors with low-grade nuclear features, or infiltrative high-grade tumors, careful examination coupled with a judicious panel of IHC markers usually resolves the diagnosis. This review offers concise algorithms for diagnosis of kidney neoplasia with the latest recognized, provisional, and emerging entities to daily pathology practice.

Ocular adnexal metastases from renal cell carcinoma: An update and comprehensive literature review

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this study was to review the clinical presentation, systemic work-up, and outcomes of all previously reported ocular adnexal (OA) metastases from renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

METHODS:

This was a literature review. PubMed and Google Scholar databases were searched for all well-documented cases of OA metastases from RCC.

RESULTS:

Final analysis identified 44 patients with either biopsy-confirmed (41/44, 93%) or treatment response-documented (3/44, 6%) OA metastases from RCC. Thirty-four (77%) patients were male. The median age was 60 years (mean: 60, range: 22–87 years). The most common presenting signs were proptosis (19/44, 43%) and OA mass (14/44, 32%). Metastases most frequently involved the orbital bones (10/44, 23%) and adjacent extraconal fat, extending from the sinonasal tract in 7/10 (70%) of these cases. OA metastases were initial manifestation of RCC in 18/44 (41%) patients. At the time of primary tumor diagnosis, 22 of 30 (73%) patients had American Joint Committee on Cancer Stage IV disease with metastases to 2 or more sites in 13 (57%) patients. Seventeen of 42 (40%) patients underwent local therapy only, which most commonly included excision/exenteration with margin control (10/17, 59%). Twenty-five of 42 (60%) patients had systemic therapy, which included biologic agents and chemotherapy. The absolute 5-year survival rate was 66% with significantly improved survival in patients reported after 2006 (92% vs. 42%, P = 0.04) and in those with isolated OA metastases (100% vs. 27%, P = 0.02) at 30 months.

CONCLUSION:

Although RCC metastases to OA occur in a setting of advanced disease, the recent advances in diagnostic modalities and targeted therapies resulted in improved survival.

Renal Cell Carcinoma Antigen Expression in Primary Cutaneous Endocrine Mucinous Carcinomas: A Case Series of 14 Patients and Review of the Literature

Endocrine mucin-producing sweat gland carcinoma (EMPSGC) and primary cutaneous mucinous carcinoma (PCMC) are both uncommon low-grade cutaneous adnexal tumors with predilection for the eyelids of elderly women. Their clinical appearance is nonspecific, typically presenting as a slowly growing poorly circumscribed papule, nodule, plaque, or swelling. Histological features of EMPSGC include a lobulated dermal neoplasm with bland cytology and an invasive mucinous component in up to half of the cases. PCMC exhibits tumor nests suspended in abundant pools of mucin with focal strands or nests of tumor cells infiltrating the dermis. Because of their rarity and banal cytological features, both entities pose a risk for misdiagnosis with other benign/malignant cutaneous adnexal neoplasms. Histomorphological features can suggest a diagnosis of EMPSGC or PCMC, but immunohistochemistry is necessary for confirmation. A review of the literature showed variable results of antigens present in EMPSGC, and many of the positive markers only show sparse or focal immunoreactivity of tumor cells. As a result, diffusely positive markers play a crucial role in identification of these tumors, particularly with initial superficial biopsies. We present 9 cases of EMPSGC and 5 cases of PCMC with strong and diffuse immunoreactivity to renal cell carcinoma antigen. This novel finding can be useful in the diagnosis of EMPSGC and PCMC in combination with other known positive markers to differentiate them from other cutaneous neoplasms. In addition, it provides further evidence that EMPSGC could be a precursor lesion to PCMC with both existing on a spectrum.

Immunohistochemistry in Diagnostic Parathyroid Pathology

Pathologists are usually readily able to diagnose parathyroid tissues and diseases, particularly when they have knowledge of the clinical information, laboratory findings, and radiographic imaging studies. However, the identification of parathyroid tissue or lesions can be difficult in small biopsies, ectopic locations, supranumerary glands, and in some oxyphil/oncocytic lesions. Widely available immunohistochemical studies such as chromogranin-A, synaptophysin, keratin, parathyroid hormone, thyroglobulin, and thyroid transcription factor-1 can help in difficult cases. One of the most difficult diagnostic aspects faced by the pathologist in evaluating parathyroid is distinguishing between parathyroid adenoma, particularly atypical adenoma, and parathyroid carcinoma. Many markers have and continue to be evaluated for diagnostic utility, and are even beginning to be studied for prognostic utility. Single immunohistochemical markers such as parafibromin and Ki-67 are among the most studied and most utilized, but many additional markers have and continue to be evaluated such as galectin-3, PGP9.5, Rb, bcl2, p27, hTERT, mdm2, and APC. Although not widely available in many laboratories, a panel of immunohistochemical markers may prove most useful as an adjunct in the evaluation of challenging parathyroid tumors.

Immunohistochemistry, carcinomas of unknown primary, and incidence rates

Pathologists use immunohistochemistry is their day-to-day practices to assist in distinguishing site of origin of metastatic carcinomas. Here, the work-up is discussed neuroendocrine carcinomas, squamous cell carcinomas and adenocarcinomas with particular attention to tumor incident rates and predictive values of the best-performing immunohistochemical markers.

Metastatic sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma manifesting as a subcutaneous soft tissue mass

Metastases from visceral malignancies to subcutaneous soft tissues are relatively rare and their diagnosis requires a high level of suspicion. It is even more challenging if a metastatic lesion shows non-specific high-grade spindle cell morphology overlapping with various primary cutaneous and soft tissue tumors. We describe a unique case of subcutaneous metastasis of sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma which was the first manifestation of the occult malignancy. The patient had a history of lipomas and dysplastic nevi and presented with an upper back mass. The mass, located superficially within the subcutis, was composed of atypical spindle cells arranged in a storiform pattern. By immunohistochemistry, the tumor cells were strongly diffusely positive for cytokeratin AE1/AE3 and vimentin and negative for Melan-A, S-100 protein, SOX10, melanoma cocktail, epithelial membrane antigen (EMA), p63, CK7, CK18, CK20, smooth muscle actin (SMA), desmin, CD34, TTF-1, CD21, CD99 and bcl-2. Scattered tumor cells were positive for MDM2 immunostain, but MDM2 amplification was not detected using fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). Co-expression of cytokeratin and vimentin by the tumor raised the possibility of metastatic renal cell carcinoma and positivity of the tumor for PAX8 supported this hypothesis. A large renal mass was detected radiologically and the subsequent nephrectomy specimen showed high-grade clear cell renal cell carcinoma with sarcomatoid features.

Paraneoplastic Glomerulopathy in a Case of Collecting Duct Renal Cell Carcinoma

Paraneoplastic glomerulopathy has been described in established cases of the solid tumors of lung, gastrointestinal system, breast, etc., and rarely in patients with Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC). Studies on secondary glomerular diseases have described a higher incidence of IgA nephropathy in patients with RCC compared to membranous glomerulopathy, which are commonly reported in malignancies of the lung and gastrointestinal tract. Collecting Duct Carcinoma (CDC), a rare high grade adenocarcinoma accounts for <1% of all renal malignancies. It arises from the cells of the collecting ducts of Bellini. We report a case of an elderly male who was diagnosed to have a disseminated CDC during his evaluation for nephrotic syndrome. Renal biopsy was suggestive of a secondary membranous glomerulonephropathy.

Water Clear Cell Adenoma of the Parathyroid Gland: A Forgotten Cause of Primary Hyperparathyroidism

Water clear cell adenoma of the parathyroid gland is a rare neoplasm composed of large clear cells with foamy cytoplasm and mild nuclear pleomorphism, compressing the residual nonneoplastic parathyroid tissue. The differential diagnosis includes a variety of neoplasms with clear cell features. In this article, we provide an overview of the entity with a historical perspective, in order to help pathologists in distinguishing it from other neoplasms in their daily practice.

Metastatic carcinoma of unknown primary: diagnostic approach using immunohistochemistry

Carcinoma of unknown primary origin (CUP) is one of the 10 most prevalent malignancies. CUP patients in whom a site of origin can be ascribed have better outcomes than those in which the primary tumor remains unidentified. Among the tools available to pathologists in approaching these lesions, immunohistochemistry is a reliable, inexpensive, and widely available resource. New markers continue to emerge, which, in combination with other historically useful antibodies, allow rapid and accurate identification of primary site in an increasing number of cases. This review discusses the approach to the diagnosis of CUP using immunohistochemistry and outlines some of the most useful markers with a particular focus on the utility of lineage-restricted transcription factors, including CDX2, NKX3-1, PAX8, SATB2, TTF-1, and SF1.

A clearer view of the molecular complexity of clear cell renal cell carcinoma

The von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) tumor suppressor gene is mutated as an early event in almost all cases of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), the most frequent form of kidney cancer. In this review we discuss recent advances in understanding how dysregulation of the many hypoxia-inducible factor α-dependent and -independent functions of the VHL tumor suppressor protein (pVHL) can contribute to tumor initiation and progression. Recent evidence showing extensive inter- and intratumoral genetic diversity has given rise to the idea that ccRCC should actually be considered as a series of molecularly related, yet distinct, diseases defined by the pattern of combinatorial genetic alterations present within the cells of the tumor. We highlight the range of genetic and epigenetic alterations that recur in ccRCC and discuss the mechanisms through which these events appear to function cooperatively with a loss of pVHL function in tumorigenesis.

Histologic variations and immunohistochemical features of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Due to advancements in treatment of metastatic and advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC), it has become increasingly important to diagnose metastatic RCC and the specific subtype. In this study, we investigated the diverse histologic features of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (CCRCC) cases in comparison with corresponding primary lesions.

METHODS

We identified 119 metastatic CCRCC cases from 81 corresponding primary lesions diagnosed between 1995 and 2010 and evaluated the diverse histologic and immunohistochemical features of these lesions.

RESULTS

A total of 44 primary lesions (54.3%) had a non-clear cell component in addition to a typical clear cell component. Of the 119 metastatic lesions, 63 lesions (52.9%) contained a non-clear cell component, and 29 metastatic lesions were composed of a non-clear cell component only. Rhabdoid features were the most frequent non-clear cell histology among the metastatic lesions. Metastatic CCRCCs mainly showed positive CD10 and epithelial membrane antigen staining and negative cytokeratin 7 staining.

CONCLUSIONS

Metastatic CCRCC commonly showed a variety of histologic features. If there is a difficulty to diagnose metastatic CCRCC due to a variety of histologic features or small biopsy specimen, histologic review of the primary lesion and immunohistochemical analysis can help determine the correct diagnosis.

Value of PAX8, PAX2, napsin A, carbonic anhydrase IX, and claudin-4 immunostaining in distinguishing pleural epithelioid mesothelioma from metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Both mesotheliomas and renal cell carcinomas can present a wide variety of cytomorphologic features and histologic patterns. Because of this, renal cell carcinomas metastatic to the pleura and lung can be confused with mesotheliomas. Recently, a variety of positive carcinoma markers, including kidney-associated markers, have become available. The aim of this study is to investigate the value of some of these markers, specifically PAX8, PAX2, napsin A, carbonic anhydrase IX, and claudin-4, for assisting in distinguishing pleural epithelioid mesotheliomas from metastatic renal cell carcinomas. To do so, a total of 40 pleural epithelioid mesotheliomas and 55 renal cell carcinomas (33 clear cell, 10 papillary, and 12 chromophobe) were investigated. In all, 91% of the renal cell carcinomas expressed claudin-4, 89% PAX8, 60% PAX2, 71% carbonic anhydrase IX, and 29% napsin A. All of the mesotheliomas were positive for carbonic anhydrase IX and were negative for all of the other markers. On the basis of these results, it is concluded that claudin-4 and PAX8 have a higher sensitivity and specificity for assisting in discriminating between pleural epithelioid mesotheliomas and renal cell carcinomas when compared with all of the other positive carcinoma markers that are, at present, recommended to be included in the immunohistochemical panels used in this differential diagnosis. Even though PAX2 and napsin A are highly specific, because of their low sensitivity, they have only a limited value. Carbonic anhydrase IX is not useful.

Intrathyroidal parathyroid carcinoma: report of an unusual case and review of the literature

Intrathyroidal parathyroid carcinoma is an exceedingly rare cause of primary hyperparathyroidism. A 51-year-old African American female presented with goiter, hyperparathyroidism, and symptomatic hypercalcemia. Sestamibi scan revealed diffuse activity within an enlarged thyroid gland with uptake in the right thyroid lobe suggestive of hyperfunctioning parathyroid tissue. The patient underwent thyroidectomy and parathyroidectomy. At exploration, a 2.0 cm nodule in the usual location of the right inferior parathyroid was sent for intraoperative frozen consultation, which revealed only ectopic thyroid tissue. No parathyroid glands were identified grossly on the external aspect of the thyroid. Interestingly, postoperative parathyroid hormone levels normalized after removal of the thyroid gland. Examination of the thyroidectomy specimen revealed a 1.4 cm parathyroid nodule located within the parenchyma of the right superior thyroid, with capsular and vascular invasion and local infiltration into surrounding thyroid tissue. We present only the eighth reported case of intrathyroidal parathyroid carcinoma and review the literature.

PAX2 and PAX8 Expression in Primary and Metastatic Renal Tumors: A Comprehensive Comparison

Context.—The diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remains problematic, especially in the context of metastasis or small-needle biopsies. PAX2 and PAX8 transcription factors are known to be expressed by several histologic types of renal neoplasms.

Objective.—To evaluate the diagnostic utility of PAX2 and PAX8 relative to one another, which has not been studied.

Design.—Consecutive tissue sections from the archival samples of 243 primary and 99 metastatic renal neoplasms were submitted to PAX2 and PAX8 immunostain.

Results.—Within the primary neoplasms, PAX2 versus PAX8 expression was noted in 90 of 95 (95%) versus 92 of 95 (97%) for clear cell RCC, 29 of 38 (76%) versus 38 of 38 (100%) for papillary RCC, 14 of 25 (56%) versus 22 of 25 (88%) for chromophobe RCC, 3 of 7 (43%) versus 5 of 7 (71%) for collecting duct RCC, 6 of 8 (75%) versus 8 of 8 (100%) for acquired cystic kidney disease–related RCC, and 7 of 13 (54%) versus 11 of 13 (85%) for oncocytoma. Regardless of histologic subtype, PAX8 staining was noted in more cells and with more intense staining than PAX2. Within the metastatic RCCs, PAX8 expression was more frequently positive than PAX2 expression (88 of 99 cases; 89%; versus 75 of 99 cases; 76%).

Conclusions.—Both PAX2 and PAX8 are diagnostically useful markers for both primary and metastatic renal neoplasms of a large variety of histologic types. However, PAX8 appears to be more sensitive than PAX2 in both primary and metastatic settings. PAX8 can be included in any immunohistochemical panel for the diagnosis of primary renal neoplasms. Adding PAX2 should be optional, but this would gain limited further diagnostic yield. In a metastatic setting, both PAX8 and PAX2 can be included in a panel because a small subset of metastatic RCCs are stained only with PAX2.

Value of PAX2 immunostaining in tumor diagnosis: a review and update

PAX2 is a member of the PAX family of transcription factors that, together with PAX8, is involved in the regulation of the organogenesis of the kidney and the Müllerian system. Recent investigations have demonstrated that, among tumors, PAX2 is commonly expressed in epithelial tumors of the kidney and female genital tract. Although PAX2 expression has also been reported in B-cell lymphomas and rhabdomyosarcomas, especially alveolar rhabdomyosarcomas, it has been suggested that the positivity in these tumors was most probably due to a cross-reactivity of the anti-PAX2 antibody used in those investigations with other members of the PAX protein family. An analysis of published studies indicates that PAX2 sensitivity for epithelial renal neoplasms and epithelial tumors of the female genital tract is lower than that of PAX8. In contrast to the latter marker, however, PAX2 does not appear to be expressed in epithelial tumors of the thyroid gland or thymus. Because of its restricted expression, PAX2 has proved to be a useful immunohistochemical marker with a wide range of diagnostic applications in surgical pathology, some of which will be briefly reviewed.

Application of immunohistochemistry in the diagnosis of epithelioid mesothelioma: a review and update

A large number of immunohistochemical markers that can assist in the differential diagnosis of epithelioid mesotheliomas are currently available. Because these markers are expressed differently in the various types of carcinomas that can metastasize to the serosal membranes and can potentially be confused with epithelioid mesothelioma, their selection for inclusion in a diagnostic panel largely depends on the differential diagnosis, as well as on which ones work the best in a given laboratory. Traditionally, the panels used in the differential diagnosis of epithelioid mesothelioma have consisted of a combination of positive mesothelioma markers and broad-spectrum carcinoma markers. At present, a wide variety of organ-associated carcinoma markers such as thyroid transcription factor-1 and napsin A for the lung, PAX 8 and PAX 2 for the kidney, and Müllerian-derived tumors; gross cystic disease fluid protein-15 and mammaglobin for the breast; and CDX2 for intestinal differentiation are available, which can assist in establishing the site of origin of an adenocarcinoma when included in a diagnostic panel. This article provides updated information on the composition of the panels of markers recommended in the various differential diagnoses.

Role of immunohistochemistry in diagnosing renal neoplasms: when is it really useful?

CONTEXT

With the refinement of molecular and histologic classifications of renal neoplasms and the availability of more-effective molecular targeted therapy for specific renal neoplasms, immunohistochemical techniques will play an increasingly important role in the diagnosis of renal neoplasm. During the past few decades, many markers have been evaluated for their role in the diagnosis, prognosis, and prediction of treatment for renal neoplasms. The number of useful markers in our routine practice continues to increase. The challenge will be to choose among them and to decide in which situations immunohistochemistry will be truly useful.

OBJECTIVES

To review the diagnostic utility of molecular markers for renal neoplasms and common diagnostic scenarios that call for immunohistochemistry in routine practice.

DATA SOURCES

This review is based on published literature and personal experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Some of the most important and useful markers for the diagnosis of renal neoplasm include cytokeratins, vimentin, PAX2, PAX8, RCC marker, CD10, E-cadherin, kidney-specific cadherin, parvalbumin, claudin-7, claudin-8, α-methylacyl coenzyme A racemase, CD117, TFE3, thrombomodulin, uroplakin III, p63, CD57, and carbonic anhydrase IX. Each marker has its diagnostic role in a specific diagnostic setting. The common diagnostic situations that call for immunohistochemical staining are differential diagnoses of renal versus nonrenal neoplasms, histologic subtyping of renal cell carcinoma, diagnosis of rare primary renal neoplasms, diagnosis of renal neoplasms in small core-biopsy specimens, diagnosis of possible metastatic renal carcinomas, and less frequently, molecular prognostication.

Value of PAX 8 immunostaining in tumor diagnosis: a review and update

PAX 8 is a transcription factor involved in the regulation of organogenesis of the thyroid gland, kidney, and Müllerian system. Recent studies have shown that, among tumors, PAX 8 is commonly expressed in epithelial tumors of the thyroid and parathyroid glands, kidney, thymus, and female genital tract. Although PAX 8 expression has also been reported in certain neuroendocrine tumors, including well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, and duodenal and rectal carcinoids, as well as in B-cell lymphomas, it has recently been shown that the PAX 8 positivity reported in these tumors was due to a cross-reactivity of the antibody used with the N-terminal region of PAX 6 and PAX 5, respectively. Owing to its restricted expression, PAX 8 has proved to be a useful immunohistochemical marker with a wide range of diagnostic applications in surgical pathology, some of which are briefly reviewed.

Unclassified renal cell carcinoma: a report of 56 cases

What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Unclassified RCC represents 0.7-5.7% of renal tumours. Limited reported data from two series suggests that unclassified RCC is an aggressive form of RCC, mainly because most cases are at an advanced stage at presentation, but overall and cancer-specific survival were not significantly different between unclassified and clear-cell RCC in an additional series of 38 patients. Our study of 56 cases of unclassified RCC describes the pathological features that can be applied to predict prognosis on a daily basis. In particular nuclear grade, TNM classification, tumour coagulative necrosis, tumour size, microvascular invasion and 2004 WHO histotype are independent predictors of disease-free and cancer-specific survival.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinicopathological features and outcomes of 56 patients with unclassified renal cell carcinoma (RCC) meeting 2004 World Health Organization diagnostic criteria.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Urological pathology files of the participating institutions were reviewed and cases of unclassified RCC that met the inclusion criteria were retrieved. Nuclear grade, pT status, tumour size, regional lymph node involvement, distant metastases, coagulative tumour necrosis, mucin and sarcomatoid differentiation were evaluated in radical nephrectomy or nephron-sparing specimens. Significant factors in univariate analysis were then assessed by a multivariate analysis of independent prognostic factors using Cox proportional hazard regression analysis.

RESULTS

Fifty-six cases met the histological criteria for unclassified RCC. Thirty-four (61%) cases were categorized as unrecognizable cell type (mean overall survival 47 months; median 36 months), 20 (36%) as composites of recognized types (mean overall survival 36 months; median 26 months), and two (4%) (mean survival 16 months; median 16 months) as pure sarcomatoid morphology without recognizable epithelial elements. Cox multivariate analysis showed nuclear grade (P = 0.020), stage (P < 0.001), tumour coagulative necrosis (P = 0.018), tumour size (P < 0.001), microvascular invasion (P < 0.001) and tumour histotype (P = 0.028) to be independent predictors of disease-free survival, with tumour size being the most significant (hazard ratio [HR] 9.068, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.231-25.453). Nuclear grade (P = 0.026), stage (P < 0.001), tumour coagulative necrosis (P < 0.001), tumour size (P = 0.044), microvascular invasion (P < 0.001), tumour recurrence after surgery (P < 0.001) and tumour histotype (P = 0.056) were independent predictors of cancer-specific survival, with tumour recurrence after surgery being the most significant (HR 14.713, 95% CI 5.329-40.622).

CONCLUSION

The prognosis of patients with unclassified RCC seems to be related to clinicopathological features known to be relevant in common forms of RCC.

Immunohistochemical distinction of primary adrenal cortical lesions from metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma: a study of 248 cases

The diagnosis of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (CC-RCC) can be difficult because of its morphologic heterogeneity and the increasing use of small image-guided biopsies that yield scant diagnostic material. This is further complicated by the degree of morphologic and immunophenotypic overlap with nonrenal neoplasms and tissues, such as adrenal cortex. In this study, a detailed immunoprofile of 63 adrenal cortical lesions, which included 54 cortical neoplasms, was compared with 185 metastatic CC-RCCs using traditional [anticalretinin, CD10, antichromogranin, antiepithelial membrane antigen, anti-inhibin, antimelanA, anticytokeratins (AE1/AE3 and AE1/CAM5.2), antirenal cell carcinoma marker, and antisynaptophysin)] and novel [anticarbonic anhydrase-IX, antihepatocyte nuclear factor-1b, antihuman kidney injury molecule-1 (hKIM-1), anti-PAX-2, anti-PAX-8, antisteroidogenic factor-1 (SF-1), and anti-T-cell immunoglobulin mucin-1] antibodies. Tissue microarray methodology was used to simulate small image-guided biopsies. Staining extent and intensity were scored semiquantitatively for each antibody. In comparing different intensity thresholds required for a "positive" result, a value of ≥2+ was identified as optimal for diagnostic sensitivity/specificity. For the distinction of adrenal cortical lesions from metastatic CC-RCCs, immunoreactivity for the adrenal cortical antigens SF-1 (86% adrenal; 0% CC-RCC), calretinin (89% adrenal; 10% CC-RCC), inhibin (86% adrenal; 9% CC-RCC), and melanA (86% adrenal; 10% CC-RCC) and for the renal epithelial antigens hKIM-1 (0% adrenal; 83% CC-RCC), PAX-8 (0% adrenal; 83% CC-RCC), hepatocyte nuclear factor-1b (0% adrenal; 76% CC-RCC), epithelial membrane antigen (0% adrenal; 78% CC-RCC), and carbonic anhydrase-IX (3% adrenal; 87% CC-RCC) had the most potential use. Use of novel renal epithelial markers hKIM-1 (clone AKG7) and/or PAX-8 and the adrenocortical marker SF-1 in an immunohistochemical panel for distinguishing adrenal cortical lesions from metastatic CC-RCC offers improved diagnostic sensitivity and specificity.

Cluster analysis of immunohistochemical profiles delineates CK7, vimentin, S100A1 and C-kit (CD117) as an optimal panel in the differential diagnosis of renal oncocytoma from its mimics

AIMS

To develop an immunohistochemical strategy for distinguishing renal oncocytoma (RO) from the eosinophilic variant of chromophobe (ChRCC), and papillary (PRCC) and clear cell (CRCC) renal cell carcinoma containing eosinophilic cytoplasm in core biopsy specimens.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Cluster analysis was performed on immunohistochemical data from 21 RO, 16 ChRCC, 16 CRCC and 20 PRCC patients. A panel of CK7, C-kit, S100A1 and vimentin clustered into four groups. Cluster A (94% ChRCC) expressed C-kit and CK7 and lacked S100A1 and vimentin. Cluster B (95% RO) expressed C-kit, S100A1, focal CK7 (single or small clusters of cells) and lacked vimentin. Cluster C comprised a mixture of PRCC and CRCC with no expression of C-kit or CK7 and variable S100A1 and vimentin. PRCC with strong expression of CK7 clustered into group D. A panel of S100A1 (positive) and focal CK7 expression distinguished RO from ChRCC with 91% sensitivity and 93% specificity. A panel of vimentin (negative) and C-kit (positive) distinguished RO from CRCC with 83% sensitivity and 86% specificity and RO from PRCC with 79% sensitivity and 88% specificity.

CONCLUSIONS

Hierarchical cluster analysis is an effective approach to analyse high-volume immunohistochemical data to generate an optimal panel in the differential diagnosis of oncocytoma from its mimics.

Immunohistochemical diagnosis of renal neoplasms

CONTEXT

Histologic diagnosis of renal neoplasm is usually straightforward by routine light microscopy. However, immunomarkers may be essential in several contexts, including differentiating renal from nonrenal neoplasms, subtyping of renal cell carcinoma (RCC), and diagnosing rare types of renal neoplasms or metastatic RCC in small biopsy specimens.

OBJECTIVE

To provide a comprehensive review of the diagnostic utility of immunomarkers for renal neoplasms.

DESIGN

This review is based on published literature and personal experience.

CONCLUSIONS

The following markers may have diagnostic utility in various diagnostic contexts: cytokeratins, vimentin, α-methylacyl coenzyme A racemase, carbonic anhydrase IX, PAX2, PAX8, RCC marker, CD10, E-cadherin, kidney-specific cadherin, parvalbumin, claudin-7, claudin-8, S100A1, CD82, CD117, TFE3, thrombomodulin, uroplakin III, p63, and S100P. Cytokeratins are uniformly expressed by RCC, albeit in a somewhat limited amount in some subtypes, requiring broad-spectrum anti-CK antibodies, including both low- and high-molecular-weight cytokeratins. PAX2 and PAX8 are sensitive and relatively specific markers for renal neoplasm, regardless of subtype. CD10 and RCC marker are sensitive to renal cell neoplasms derived from proximal tubules, including clear cell and papillary RCCs. Kidney-specific cadherin, parvalbumin, claudin-7, and claudin-8 are sensitive markers for renal neoplasms from distal portions of the nephron, including chromophobe RCC and oncocytoma. CK7 and α-methylacyl coenzyme A racemase are sensitive markers for papillary RCC; TFE3 expression is essential in confirming the diagnosis of Xp11 translocation RCC. The potentially difficult differential diagnosis between chromophobe RCC and oncocytoma may be facilitated by S100A1 and CD82. Thrombomodulin, uroplakin III, p63, and S100P are useful markers for urothelial carcinoma. Together with high-molecular-weight cytokeratins, PAX2, and PAX8, they can help differentiate renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma from collecting duct RCC. A sensitive marker for sarcomatoid RCC is still not available. Immunomarkers are most often used for diagnosing metastatic RCC. Compared with primary RCC, expression of the above-mentioned markers is often less frequent and less diffuse in the metastatic setting. Recognizing the variable sensitivity and specificity of these markers, it is important to include at least CD10, RCC marker, PAX2, and PAX8 in the diagnostic panel.

Utility of PAX8 and PAX2 immunohistochemistry in the identification of renal cell carcinoma in diagnostic cytology

The diagnosis of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in cytology specimens may be difficult to confirm on the basis of cytomorphology alone. Often, immunohistochemistry serves as an important adjunct in confirming this diagnosis. Recently, PAX2 was shown to be useful in this regard. In this study, we sought to compare the utility of PAX8 to that of PAX2 immunohistochemistry in the diagnosis of RCC in cytology specimens. First, we verified the performance of PAX8 immunohistochemistry on a tissue microarray (TMA) composed of 54 cases of RCC; PAX8 immunoreactivity was seen in at least 10% of the tumor cells in all cases. Next, we applied PAX8 immunohistochemistry to cell block sections prepared from 24 cases of RCC, obtained from fine-needle aspirates and effusion specimens. PAX2 immunohistochemistry was performed for comparison. Immunopositivity was defined as the presence of nuclear staining in at least 10% of tumor cell nuclei. Immunoreactivity for PAX8 and PAX2 was seen in 21 (88%) and 20 (83%) of the 24 cases, respectively. The presence of either PAX8 or PAX2 immunostaining was present in 22 of 24 cases, thus showing a total sensitivity of 92%. Overall, the results indicate that PAX8 and PAX2 are diagnostically useful adjuncts in confirming the diagnosis of RCC in cytology specimens.

The use of immunohistochemistry in the diagnosis of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma: a review of PAX-8, PAX-2, hKIM-1, RCCma, and CD10

The diagnosis of metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma may be difficult in some cases, particularly in the small image-guided biopsies that are becoming more common. As targeted therapies for renal cell carcinoma are now standard treatment, the recognition and diagnosis of renal cell carcinoma has become even more critical. Many adjunctive immunohistochemical markers of renal epithelial lineage such as CD10 and RCCma have been proposed as aids in the diagnosis of metastatic renal cell carcinoma, but low specificities often limit their utility. More recently described markers (PAX-2, PAX-8, human kidney injury molecule-1, hepatocyte nuclear factor-1-β, and carbonic anhydrase-IX) offer the potential for greater sensitivity and specificity in this diagnostic setting; however, knowledge of their expected staining in other neoplasms and tissues is critical for appropriate use. In this review, we discuss the most widely used immunohistochemical markers of renal lineage with an emphasis on their sensitivity and specificity for metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Subsequently, we present a variety of organ-specific differential diagnostic scenarios in which metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma might be considered and we propose immunopanels for use in each situation.

[The initial CUP situation and CUP syndrome: pathological diagnostics]

"Cancer of unknown primary (site)" (CUP) represents a frequent and often difficult task for diagnostic histopathology. In the initial CUP situation, immunohistochemistry, which is relatively cost-efficient and non-burdensome for the patient, contributes substantially to the targeted search for and identification of the primary tumor. It may be performed in a two-step algorithm (keratins as the first step, group and selective markers as the second step). However, in true CUP syndrome--a heterogeneous disease whose etiology and pathogenesis is still poorly understood--the primary tumor is rarely identified, and the immunohistochemical marker profile is often anomalous. Nevertheless, immunohistochemistry remains the most important special method, aiming at the phenotypical classification and particularly the identification of certain favorable therapy-responsive subsets. Novel methods for subtyping of CUP based on the analysis of gene expression profiles need to be further evaluated before their possible diagnostic application. Future basic and clinical research is required to unravel the still enigmatic tumor biology of the CUP syndrome and to improve the hitherto very unfavorable prognosis by developing new efficient therapy regimens.

PAX8 reliably distinguishes ovarian serous tumors from malignant mesothelioma

Ovarian serous neoplasms can have morphologic overlap with malignant mesothelioma. The distinction is clinically important, yet most studies have failed to identify immunostains that reliably distinguish these 2 tumor types. Recently, transcription factor PAX8 was shown to be a sensitive and relatively specific marker for Müllerian tumors. In addition, some studies suggest that h-caldesmon is sensitive and specific for mesothelioma when compared with serous ovarian tumors. The goal of this study was to evaluate whether PAX8 and h-caldesmon expression can successfully distinguish mesothelioma from serous ovarian tumors. Immunohistochemistry was carried out using PAX8 and h-caldesmon antibodies on archival tissue from 254 ovarian serous tumors and 50 mesothelial tumors. Nuclear and cytoplasmic immunoreactivity were considered positive for PAX8 and h-caldesmon, respectively. PAX8 staining was present in 99% of high-grade serous ovarian carcinomas and all (100%) low-grade ovarian carcinomas and serous borderline tumors; however, only 74% of these cases (188/254) were diffusely positive in more than 50% of tumors cells, and intensity ranged from strong to weak. None of the pleural malignant mesotheliomas were reactive with PAX8. However, 2/23 (9%) peritoneal malignant mesotheliomas showed focal and/or weak staining for PAX8; the remaining cases were negative. Two well-differentiated papillary mesotheliomas and 1 multicystic mesothelioma each showed some staining for PAX8. h-caldesmon was negative in all serous neoplasms and all mesothelial neoplasms, except 1 pleural malignant mesothelioma which showed patchy immunoreactivity. Strong PAX8 staining is highly specific (P<0.00001) for ovarian serous tumors when compared with malignant mesotheliomas of the peritoneum and pleura. The presence of weak staining for PAX8 in the 3 "noninvasive" mesotheliomas questions the use for PAX8 in this differential diagnosis. On the basis of this study, h-caldesmon is not a useful marker for mesothelioma.

Expression of PAX8 in normal and neoplastic renal tissues: an immunohistochemical study

Cell-lineage-specific transcription factors are a group of regulatory proteins expressed in embryonic, differentiated, or neoplastic cells of the same lineage and represent a valuable repertoire of tissue-specific markers for the diagnosis of human tumors. Together with PAX2, PAX8 is a nephric-lineage transcription factor and is required for the establishment of renal-lineage cells and the formation of the kidney. In contrast to PAX2, little is known about the expression of PAX8 in adult kidney and renal tumors. In this study, we used immunohistochemistry to investigate the expression of PAX8 in adult human kidney and renal epithelial tumors. We report here that PAX8 was detected in renal epithelial cells in all segments of renal tubules from the proximal tubules to the renal papillae and in the parietal cells of Bowman's capsule in the adult kidney. PAX8 was also present in 98% of clear cell renal cell carcinomas (RCCs), 90% of papillary RCCs, and 95% of oncocytomas, similar to PAX2. In addition, PAX8 was found in 82% of chromophobe RCCs, 71% of sarcomatoid components of RCCs, and 100% (2/2) of renal medullary carcinomas. Overall, PAX8 was detected in 85% of metastatic renal tumors. Interestingly, expression of PAX8 was noted in some urothelial cells in the renal pelvis and ureters and approximately 23% of urothelial carcinomas of the renal pelvis, but not in the urothelium or urothelial carcinomas of the urinary bladder; this probably underlines the different embryonic origins of urothelial cells in the upper and lower urinary tracts. As shown in this study, PAX8 is widely expressed in normal and neoplastic renal tissues. PAX8 may be a useful additional marker for renal epithelial tumors; however, its specificity and sensitivity await further investigation.