Chameleon TFE3-translocation RCC and How Gene Partners Can Change Morphology: Accurate Diagnosis Using Contemporary Modalities

TFE3-rearranged nonmelanotic renal PEComa: a case series expanding their phenotypic and fusion landscape

AIMS

A subset of exceptionally rare primary renal perivascular epithelioid cell tumours (PEComas) that harbour Xp11.2 translocation have been reported, but no larger series devoted to this topic have been published.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We describe the clinicopathological and molecular features of 10 renal PEComas, collected from our routine and consultation files. There were five female and five male patients aged 14-65 (median: 32 years). One patient had a history of childhood neuroblastoma, but no patients were known to have a tuberous sclerosis complex or other hereditary disorder. Complete surgical excision was the treatment for all patients. The available follow-up in five patients indicated a favourable outcome in 4/5 cases. Tumour size ranged from 2.8 to 15.2 cm (median, 5.2 cm). Immunohistochemistry revealed consistently strong TFE3 expression in all tumours, whereas PAX8 and keratin cocktails were uniformly negative. Other positive markers included HMB45 (7/9 tumours), CathepsinK (7/9 tumours), and CD117 (KIT) (3/5 tumours). TFE3 rearrangements were detected in 8/9 tumours (by targeted RNA sequencing in seven and by FISH in one). The identified fusion partners included SFPQ (n = 2) and one tumour each with ASPSCR1, ZC3H4, MED15, RBMX, and PRCC. One tumour that lacked TFE3 rearrangement by next-generation sequencing (NGS) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) revealed a large intrachromosomal deletion involving PKD1 and TSC2 by DNA-based NGS.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the morphologic and genetic diversity of TFE3-rearranged primary renal PEComas and underlines the value of surrogate TFE3 immunohistochemistry in identifying them. The lack of PAX8 and keratin expression represents the mainstay for distinguishing these tumours from MiTF-associated renal cell carcinomas. In addition, we report rare (ZC3H4, RBMX) and novel (MED15) TFE3 fusion partners in PEComa.

TFE3-Rearranged Tumors of the Kidney: An Emerging Conundrum

Background: Identical translocations involving the TFE3 gene and various partners have been found in both renal and soft tissue tumors, like alveolar soft part sarcoma (ASPSCR1), ossifying fibromyxoid tumor (PHF1), epithelioid hemangioendothelioma, and the clear cell stromal tumor of the lung (YAP1). Methods: Herein, we review in detail the clinicopathologic and molecular data of TFE3-rearranged renal tumors and propose our perspective, which may shed light on this emerging conundrum. Results: Among the kidney tumors carrying TFE3 translocations, most are morphologically heterogeneous carcinomas labeling for the tubular marker PAX8. The others are mesenchymal neoplasms known as PEComas, characterized by epithelioid cells co-expressing smooth muscle actin, cathepsin-K, melanogenesis markers, and sometimes melanin pigment deposition. Over the past 30 years, numerous TFE3 fusion partners have been identified, with ASPL/ASPSCR1, PRCC, SFPQ/PSF, and NONO being the most frequent. Conclusions: It is not well understood why similar gene fusions can give rise to renal tumors with different morpho-immunophenotypes, which may contribute to the recent disagreement regarding their classification. However, as these two entities, respectively, epithelial and mesenchymal in nature, are widely recognized by the pathology community and their clinicopathologic features well established, we overall believe it is still better to retain the names TFE3-rearranged renal cell carcinoma and TFE3-rearranged PEComa.

Contemporary review of papillary renal cell carcinoma-current state and future directions

Historically, papillary renal cell carcinoma (PRCC) was divided into two types, type 1 and type 2, based solely on morphology. However, it is apparent that PRCC is far more complex and represents a histological, clinical, and molecular spectrum. There has been a significant evolution in our understanding of PRCC, highlighted by the recognition of new and molecularly defined entities that were previously included in PRCC type 2. This contemporary review addresses the evolving concepts regarding the PRCC, including why it is no longer needed to subtype PRCC, the current molecular landscape, prognostic parameters, and PRCC variants, including biphasic PRCC, papillary renal neoplasm with reverse polarity, and Warthin-like PRCC. Pathologists should also be aware of the potential mimickers of both low-grade and high-grade PRCCs as well as some new and emerging entities that may show papillary growth that should be excluded in the diagnostic workup. The evolving knowledge of PRCC biomarkers, morphologic patterns, and PRCC variants could also have important implications for clinical management. Lastly, the heterogeneity within the PRCC spectrum needs to be further studied, aiming to better stratify PRCC for appropriate clinical management and systemic therapy.

Cystic Features in Renal Epithelial Neoplasms and Their Increasing Clinical and Pathologic Significance

Most cystic renal tumors after resection (Boniak IIF to IV cysts) have an indolent course despite the significantly higher proportion of malignant [ie, renal cell carcinoma (RCC)] diagnosis. Most cystic renal tumors have clear cell histology that include cystic clear cell RCC and multilocular cystic renal neoplasm of low malignant potential (MCNLMP). There is growing evidence to suggest that MCNLMP, cystic clear cell RCC, and noncystic clear cell RCC form a cystic-to-solid biological spectrum with MCNLMP representing the most indolent form and with cystic clear cell RCC behaving better than noncystic (solid) clear cell RCC. Extensively (>75%) cystic clear cell RCC also has an excellent outcome similar to MCNLMP stressing the need to reevaluate the histologic criteria that separate these 2 cystic clear cell tumors. Other tumors with clear cells that can be extensively cystic such as the recently reclassified noncancerous clear cell papillary renal tumor and the newly described MED15::TFE3 RCC also have indolent course and may mimic MCNLMP. Cystic features occur also in renal tumors with nonclear cell histology including tumors capable of metastasis such as acquired cystic disease-associated, tubulocystic, fumarate hydratase-deficient, and eosinophilic solid and cystic RCCs. Cystic imaging presentation of some renal tumors such as papillary RCC can be attributed in part to pseudocystic necrosis and hemorrhage. It is important to know that tubulocystic RCC may have a lower Bosniak class presentation that overlaps with benign renal cysts (Bosniak I to IIF) that are managed conservatively. This review highlights the cystic renal tumors with clear cell and nonclear cell morphologies including some novel RCC subtypes that may have cystic features. The presence of cystic features and their extent may aid in the classification and prognostication of renal neoplasms underscoring its increasing importance in the pathologic diagnosis and reporting of renal neoplasia.

The WHO 2022 Classification of Renal Neoplasms (5th Edition): Salient Updates

The first categorization for renal tumours was made by the WHO in 1981 and included only renal cell carcinoma (RCC). After that, classification was continuously altered over five decades. The WHO 2022 Classification of Urinary and Male Genital Tumours 2022 (5th edition) is molecular-driven and contains major revisions compared to the earlier classification from 2016. This revised edition divided renal tumours into four major broad categories: clear cell renal tumours, papillary renal cell tumours, oncocytic and chromophobe renal tumours, and collecting duct tumours. 'Other renal tumours' and 'molecularly defined renal carcinomas' are two other categories that were also included. Transcription factor binding to IGHM enhancer 3 (TFE3)-rearranged, TFEB-altered, elongin C (ELOC)-mutated (formerly TCEB1)-mutated, fumarate hydratase (FH)-deficient, succinate dehydrogenase (SDH)-deficient, anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-rearranged, and SWI/SNF-related matrix-associated actin-dependent regulator of chromatin subfamily B member 1 (SMARCB1)-deficient renal cell carcinomas are molecularly defined entities. Eosinophilic vacuolated tumours and low-grade oncocytic tumours are classified as emerging entities. Molecularly characterized renal tumours include those with SMARCB1 deficiencies, TFE3 rearrangements, TFEB alterations, ALK rearrangements, ELOC mutations, etc. Thyroid-like follicular carcinoma, eosinophilic vacuolated tumour, and low-grade oncocytic tumour are a few emerging entities of renal tumours. Improved therapy targets for each kidney tumour can be achieved using immunohistochemistry (IHC) and molecular definition updates. This study aims to highlight new developments in the WHO 2022 categorization of renal tumours with regard to diagnostic, morphological, molecular, IHC, clinical, and prognostic updates.

Comparative genomics incorporating translocation renal cell carcinoma mouse model reveals molecular mechanisms of tumorigenesis

Translocation renal cell carcinoma (tRCC) most commonly involves an ASPSCR1-TFE3 fusion, but molecular mechanisms remain elusive and animal models are lacking. Here, we show that human ASPSCR1-TFE3 driven by Pax8-Cre (a credentialed clear cell RCC driver) disrupted nephrogenesis and glomerular development, causing neonatal death, while the clear cell RCC failed driver, Sglt2-Cre, induced aggressive tRCC (as well as alveolar soft part sarcoma) with complete penetrance and short latency. However, in both contexts, ASPSCR1-TFE3 led to characteristic morphological cellular changes, loss of epithelial markers, and an epithelial-mesenchymal transition. Electron microscopy of tRCC tumors showed lysosome expansion, and functional studies revealed simultaneous activation of autophagy and mTORC1 pathways. Comparative genomic analyses encompassing an institutional human tRCC cohort (including a hitherto unreported SFPQ-TFEB fusion) and a variety of tumorgraft models (ASPSCR1-TFE3, PRCC-TFE3, SFPQ-TFE3, RBM10-TFE3, and MALAT1-TFEB) disclosed significant convergence in canonical pathways (cell cycle, lysosome, and mTORC1) and less established pathways such as Myc, E2F, and inflammation (IL-6/JAK/STAT3, interferon-γ, TLR signaling, systemic lupus, etc.). Therapeutic trials (adjusted for human drug exposures) showed antitumor activity of cabozantinib. Overall, this study provides insight into MiT/TFE-driven tumorigenesis, including the cell of origin, and characterizes diverse mouse models available for research.

Molecular Characterization of TFE3-Rearranged Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Comparative Study With Papillary and Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinomas

TFE3-rearranged renal cell carcinoma (rRCC) is a rare subtype of renal cell carcinomas belonging to the MiT family translocation RCC. To further elucidate the co-alterations that occur along with TFE3 fusions in rRCC, we characterized the genomic, transcriptional, and immune landscapes in comparison to clear cell (ccRCC) and papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC). Next-generation sequencing of RNA (whole transcriptome) and DNA (592-gene panel or whole exome) for rRCC (N = 20), pRCC (N = 20), and ccRCC samples (N = 392) was performed. Patients with rRCC were significantly younger and more frequently female (median 44.5 years, 75.0% female) as compared with patients with pRCC (68.5 years, 25.0% female; P < .05) and ccRCC (62.0 years, 27.8% female; P < .05). A total of 8 unique fusion partners were observed, including a novel fusion with SRRM2::TFE3 in 2 patients. ccRCC exhibited significantly higher mutation rates of VHL (0% rRCC, 0% pRCC, 78.7% ccRCC; P < .05) and PBMR1 (0% rRCC, 5.0% pRCC, 49.4% ccRCC; P < .05). The genomic landscapes of rRCC were sparse with no mutations occurring with a prevalence higher than 10% other than pTERT (18.2% rRCC, 0% pRCC, 9.2% ccRCC). rRCC were associated with significantly less M1 macrophages (0.8%) as compared with pRCC (1.4%) and ccRCC (2.7%) (P < .05), suggesting a cold tumor-immune microenvironment. However, rRCC were more commonly PD-L1+ (rRCC 50%, pRCC 19.0%, ccRCC 12.2%; P < .05). Gene set enrichment analysis showed that rRCC are enriched in genes related to oxidative phosphorylation when compared with both ccRCC and pRCC. Despite having a colder tumor-immune microenvironment than pRCC and ccRCC, increased PDL1+ rates in rRCC suggest a potential benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors in non-conventional histologies of renal-cell carcinoma

For years, prospective randomized clinical trials excluded patients with non-conventional histologies of renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The paucity of data has led to adopting the same treatment strategies used for clear-cell RCC (ccRCC). In the present narrative review, we explored state of the art about use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in variant histologies of RCC. According to the results collected, ICIs as monotherapy showed promising antitumor activity in advanced non-clear cell (ncc)RCC. The objective response rate (ORR) was similar to that observed with single-agent anti-PD-1 in the ccRCC population, either in the first-line or the second-line setting, and responder patients experienced an early and durable benefit. Combined ICI-based strategies have shown increasing evidence in nccRCC and robust results in the sarcomatoid variants of RCC. A definitive recommendation about treating non-conventional histologies, either in adjuvant or metastatic settings, should be supported by more extensive dedicated trials.

Renal Cell Carcinoma of Variant Histology: Biology and Therapies

The term variant histology renal cell carcinomas (vhRCCs), also known as non-clear cell RCCs, refers to a diverse group of malignancies with distinct biologic and therapeutic considerations. The management of vhRCC subtypes is often based on extrapolating results from the more common clear cell RCC studies or basket trials that are not specific to each histology. The unique management of each vhRCC subtype necessitates accurate pathologic diagnosis and dedicated research efforts. Herein, we discuss tailored recommendations for each vhRCC histology informed by ongoing research and clinical experience.

MED15::TFE3 Renal Cell Carcinomas: Report of Two New Cases and Review of the Literature Confirming Nearly Universal Multilocular Cystic Morphology

We report two novel cases of Xp11 translocation renal cell carcinomas with the MED15::TFE3 gene fusion in adult females aged 40 and 74 years. Both cases were extensively cystic and contained only minimal clear cells lining cysts and within septal walls, raising the differential diagnosis of multilocular cystic renal neoplasm of low malignant potential. By immunohistochemistry, both neoplasms labeled for PAX8, TFE3, cathepsin K and Melan A but not for HMB45. On review of the published literature and the two cases reported herein, over 90% of MED15::TFE3 renal cell carcinomas (RCCs) have been described as cystic. The correlation of the MED15::TFE3 fusion with extensively cystic morphology represents the strongest association of TFE3 fusion partner with clinicopathological features among TFE3-rearranged RCC reported to date.

Clinical Characteristics of Molecularly Defined Renal Cell Carcinomas

Kidney tumors comprise a broad spectrum of different histopathological entities, with more than 0.4 million newly diagnosed cases each year, mostly in middle-aged and older men. Based on the description of the 2022 World Health Organization (WHO) classification of renal cell carcinoma (RCC), some new categories of tumor types have been added according to their specific molecular typing. However, studies on these types of RCC are still superficial, many types of these RCC currently lack accurate diagnostic standards in the clinic, and treatment protocols are largely consistent with the treatment guidelines for clear cell RCC (ccRCC), which might result in worse treatment outcomes for patients with these types of molecularly defined RCC. In this article, we conduct a narrative review of the literature published in the last 15 years on molecularly defined RCC. The purpose of this review is to summarize the clinical features and the current status of research on the detection and treatment of molecularly defined RCC.

TFE3 gene rearrangement and protein expression contribute to a poor prognosis of renal cell carcinoma

Background

TFE3-rearranged renal cell carcinoma (TFE3-rearranged RCC) is a type of kidney cancer with a low incidence, with no consensus about whether it has a worse prognosis than clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). This study attempted to elucidate the impact of TFE3-rearranged RCC by analyzing its clinical features and prognosis.

Methods

Patients treated in Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital (SYSMH) who were suspected to be diagnosed with TFE3-rearranged RCC were divided into two groups, TFE3-rearranged RCC and ccRCC with positive TFE3 protein expression on immunohistochemistry [TFE3(+) ccRCC], by dual-color, break-apart fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). After balancing the baseline characteristics with TFE3(+) ccRCC using the propensity score matching (PSM) method in a ratio of 2, we selected patients diagnosed with ccRCC with negative TFE3 protein expression on immunohistochemistry [TFE3(-) ccRCC]. The impact of TFE3 gene rearrangement and protein expression on renal cell carcinoma was determined by feature comparison with a nonparametric test and survival analysis with the Kaplan‒Meier method.

Results

Among 37 patients suspected of having TFE3-rearranged RCC, 13 patients were diagnosed with TFE3-rearranged RCC, and 24 patients had TFE3(+) ccRCC. The recurrence and new metastasis of TFE3-rearranged RCC was relatively common, even if the tumor stage was early at the first diagnosis. Through feature comparison and survival analysis, we found that TFE3-rearranged RCC was quite similar to TFE3(+) ccRCC. Compared with TFE3(-) ccRCC, TFE3(+) ccRCC tended to have a larger tumor diameter (P = 0.011), higher neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR) (P = 0.017) and metastatic potential (P = 0.022), and worse overall survival (OS) (P = 0.043) and PFS (P = 0.016). The survival analysis showed that TFE3-rearranged RCC had a worse PFS than ccRCC (P = 0.002), and TFE3(+) RCC had a worse PFS than TFE3(-) RCC (P = 0.001). According to the stratification system based on the combination of TFE3 and lymphovascular invasion (LVI), we further found that the prognosis from good to poor was TFE3(-) LVI(-), TFE3(+) LVI(-), TFE3(+) LVI(+) and TFE3(-) LVI(+), with statistically significant differences in both OS (P = 0.001) and PFS (P < 0.001). In addition, we also reported two cases with poor prognosis, of which one was TFE3-rearranged RCC and the other was TFE3(+) ccRCC.

Conclusions

This is a novel finding that both FISH confirmed TFE3 gene rearrangement-mediated TFE3-rearranged RCC and IHC confirmed positive TFE3 protein expression [TFE3(+)] contribute to a poor prognosis in RCC, suggesting more active treatment and careful follow-up for TFE3(+) RCC patients. The combination of TFE3 and LVI may be a new risk stratification system for RCC.

Exploration of clinicopathological features of rearranged renal cell carcinoma and TFE3, TFEB, and ALK staining performance in renal entities

Rearranged renal cell carcinomas (RCC) are rare types of kidney cancer. The clinicopathological features of rearranged RCC require further validation. The pathological diagnosis usually depends on immunohistochemistry and molecular analysis. This study aimed to explore the expression features of anti-TFE3, TFEB, and ALK in different renal entities. In addition, we collected thirty-six TFE3-rearranged RCC, two TFEB-altered RCC, and one ALK-rearranged RCC to explore their clinicopathological features. We observed that TFE3 can sometimes be weakly expressed in non-TFE3-rearranged RCC. TFE3-rearranged RCC usually exhibited strong TFE3 expression. However, clear cell RCC and FH-deficient RCC also displayed strong TFE3 expression. TFEB also can be weakly expressed in clear cell RCC. However, ALK IHC showed a relatively high specificity and was negative for all non-ALK-rearranged RCC. The ALK-rearranged RCC was analyzed using next generation sequencing to explore gene alterations, and we identified a novel gene partner, SLIT1. ALK-rearranged RCC appears to have eosinophilic cytoplasm. Tumor cells with clear cytoplasm may exclude this diagnosis. Psammomatous bodies (22/38) and pattern multiplicity (35/38) were observed in more than half of the patients. In conclusion, weak TFE3 expression did not indicate TFE3 rearrangement. Strong TFE3 expression had a higher value for indicating TFE3-rearranged RCC, although other entities can also exhibit a strong pattern. Young age combined with morphological features (psammomatous calcification and pattern multiplicity) may indicate the diagnosis of rearranged RCC.

Immune Checkpoint Therapy Combinations in Adult Advanced MiT Family Translocation Renal Cell Carcinomas

BACKGROUND

There remains a paucity of data regarding the efficacy of immune checkpoint therapy (ICT) combinations ± vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) targeted therapy (TT) in translocation renal cell carcinoma (tRCC).

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of patients with advanced tRCC treated with ICT combinations at 11 centers in the US, France, and Belgium. Only cases with confirmed fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) were included. Objective response rates (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed by RECIST, and overall survival (OS) was estimated by Kaplan-Meier methods.

RESULTS

There were 29 patients identified with median age of 38 (21-70) years, and F:M ratio 0.9:1. FISH revealed TFE3 and TFEB translocations in 22 and 7 patients, respectively. Dual ICT and ICT + VEGF TT were used in 18 and 11 patients, respectively. Seventeen (59%) patients received ICT combinations as first-line therapy. ORR was 1/18 (5.5%) for dual ICT and 4/11 (36%) for ICT + VEGF TT. At a median follow-up of 12.9 months, median PFS was 2.8 and 5.4 months in the dual ICT and ICT + VEGF TT groups, respectively. Median OS from metastatic disease was 17.8 and 30.7 months in the dual ICT and ICT + VEGF TT groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective study of advanced tRCC, limited response and survival were seen after frontline dual ICT combination therapy, while ICT + VEGF TT therapy offered some efficacy. Due to the heterogeneity of tRCC, insights into the biological underpinnings are necessary to develop more effective therapies.

Minimally invasive cytologic evaluation leading to the diagnosis of TFE3-rearranged renal cell carcinoma: A case report

TFE3-rearranged renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has been categorized as a molecularly defined renal carcinoma in the 2022 WHO classification of tumors as it does not demonstrate a specific genotype-phenotype correlation. However, in order to arrive at the diagnosis, recognition of the broad spectrum of cytologic and histologic features that can be seen in TFE3-rearranged RCC is important for differential diagnostic consideration. Reported here is the diagnostic workup of a TFE3-rearranged RCC using very limited tissue sample. The initial evaluation was dependent on the cytomorphologic findings observed on a touch preparation made from the renal mass biopsy, directing appropriate selection of ancillary tests, and leading to a definitive diagnosis.

TFE3 Rearrangement and Expression in Renal Cell Carcinoma

TFE3 rearranged Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is not very common, and demonstrates unique heterogenous morphological features overlapping other recognized entities and distinct immunoprofile. It can be seen in any age group, therefore practicing pathologists should be aware of the distinctive clinical settings and histologic findings associated with these tumors and subsequently employ an adequate panel of ancillary studies in order to confirm the diagnosis. Recognizing these entities remains crucial for future clinical trials and development of novel therapies.

What's new in the WHO 2022 classification of kidney tumours?

The World Health Organization (WHO) 2022 classification of urinary and male genital tumours (5th edition) has significantly improved our understanding of the morphologic, immunohistochemical, and molecular characteristics of renal tumours. The aim of this review is to outline the most important changes and diagnostic updates in the WHO 2022 classification of kidney tumours. A major change in this edition is the grouping of renal tumours into broader categories that include "clear cell renal tumours", "papillary renal tumours", "oncocytic and chromophobe renal tumours", "collecting duct tumours" as well as adding two categories of "other renal tumours" and "molecularly defined renal carcinomas". Novel entities included in the WHO 2022 classification are eosinophilic solid and cystic renal cell carcinoma (ESC RCC), anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-rearranged RCC and ELOC (formerly TCEB1)-mutated RCC. The category of "other renal tumours" includes a group of diverse, unrelated renal tumours that do not fit into other categories. The group of "molecularly defined renal carcinomas" reflects recent discoveries in the renal tumour genomics. These molecularly-defined renal entities demonstrate a set of morphologic features reflecting genotype-phenotype relationships. Final diagnosis of such entities rests on phenotypic and immunohistochemical (IHC) correlation, usually associated with IHC surrogate makers that reflect specific genetic abnormalities.