Translocational renal cell carcinoma (t(6;11)(p21;q12) with transcription factor EB (TFEB) amplification and an integrated precision approach: a case report

Primary retroperitoneal renal cell carcinoma associated with transcription EB gene fusion

BACKGROUND

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with the distinct type of t(6;11) (p21;q12) translocation (transcription factor EB, TFEB) is a rare neoplasm. It is even less when talks about primary retroperitoneal TFEB RCCs. To our knowledge, no previous literature has been reported about this kind of RCCs. In this article, we report a case of primary retroperitoneal renal cell carcinoma associated with transcription EB gene fusion.

METHODS

A 73-year-old male patient presented with a retroperitoneal mass for more than one month.

RESULTS

Pathologically, the mass was soft and colorful, tumor cells showed a biphasic morphology characterized by nests of larger epithelioid cells surrounding intraluminal collections of smaller cells clustered around basement membrane materia. These tumor cells were positive for Pax-8, EMA, TFEB, CK, P504S, Vimentin and CD10 on immunohistochemical stain, and positive for TFEB on fluorescence in situ hybridization assay.

CONCLUSIONS

We reported the first case of primary retroperitoneal renal cell carcinoma associated with transcription EB gene fusion. The pathological feature of the case we reported was very typical. The best treatment at presentation is the total resection. Long-term follow-up study is needed in order to acquire better diagonitic quality and fulfill diagnostic requirements.

Comprehensive study of 9 novel cases of TFEB-amplified renal cell carcinoma: an aggressive tumor with frequent PDL1 expression

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES

First described in 2014, renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with TFEB amplification (6p21) is a rare molecular subgroup whose diagnosis is challenging. The prognosis and therapeutic implications remain unclear.

METHODS

We report here the clinical, histological, immunohistochemical and genetic features of 9 novel cases. The pathological and immunohistochemical features were centrally reviewed by expert uropathologists. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) confirmed the diagnosis and comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) was performed to determine quantitative genomic alterations. We also performed an exhaustive review of the literature and compiled our data.

RESULTS

TFEB-amplified RCC were locally advanced with initial lymph node involvement in one case and liver metastasis in another case. They were high-grade eosinophilic tumors with papillary/pseudopapillary architecture, frequent positivity for melanocytic markers and frequent PDL1 expression. FISH demonstrated high-level TFEB amplification in 6 cases. One case showed concomitant TFEB translocation. CGH analysis identified complex alterations with frequent losses of 1p, 2q, 3p, 6p, and frequent 6p and 8q gains. VEGFA co-amplification was identified in all cases with a lower level than TFEB. The prognosis was poor with five patients having lymph node or distant metastases.

CONCLUSION

TFEB-amplified RCC is a rare molecular subgroup with variable morphology whose diagnosis is confirmed by FISH analysis. The complex alterations identified by CGH are consistent with an aggressive clinical behavior. The co-amplification of VEGFA and the expression of PDL1 could suggest a potential benefit from antiangiogenics and targeted immunotherapy in combination for these aggressive tumors.

TFE3 and TFEB-rearranged renal cell carcinomas: an immunohistochemical panel to differentiate from common renal cell neoplasms

TFE3/TFEB-rearranged renal cell carcinomas are characterized by translocations involving TFE3 and TFEB genes. Despite the initial description of typical morphology, their histological spectrum is wide, mimicking common subtypes of renal cell tumors. Thus, the diagnosis is challenging requiring the demonstration of the gene rearrangement, usually by FISH. However, this technique is limited in most laboratories and immunohistochemical TFE3/TFEB analysis is inconsistent. We sought to identify a useful immunohistochemical panel using the most common available markers to recognize those tumors. We performed an immunohistochemical panel comparing 27 TFE3-rearranged and 10 TFEB-rearranged renal cell carcinomas to the most common renal cell tumors (150 clear cell, 100 papillary, 50 chromophobe renal cell carcinomas, 18 clear cell papillary renal cell tumors, and 50 oncocytomas). When dealing with neoplasms characterized by cells with clear cytoplasm, CA9 is a helpful marker to exclude clear cell renal cell carcinoma. GATA3, AMACR, and CK7 are useful to rule out clear cell papillary renal cell tumor. CK7 is negative in TFE3/TFEB-rearranged renal cell carcinoma and positive in papillary renal cell carcinoma, being therefore useful in this setting. Parvalbumin and CK7/S100A1 respectively are of paramount importance when TFE3/TFEB-rearranged renal cell carcinoma resembles oncocytoma and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma. Moreover, in TFEB-rearranged renal cell carcinoma, cathepsin K and melanogenesis markers are constantly positive, whereas TFE3-rearranged renal cell carcinoma stains for cathepsin K in roughly half of the cases, HMB45 in 8% and Melan-A in 22%. In conclusion, since TFE3/TFEB-rearranged renal cell carcinoma may mimic several histotypes, an immunohistochemical panel to differentiate them from common renal cell tumors should include cathepsin K, CA9, CK7, and parvalbumin.

Clinicopathologic and Molecular Analysis of the TFEB Fusion Variant Reveals New Members of TFEB Translocation Renal Cell Carcinomas (RCCs): Expanding the Genomic Spectrum

Xp11 renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with different gene fusions may have different clinicopathologic features. We sought to identify variant fusions in TFEB translocation RCC. A total of 31 cases of TFEB RCCs were selected for the current study; MALAT1-TFEB fusion was identified in 25 cases (81%, 25/31) using fusion probes. The remaining 6 cases (19%, 6/31) were further analyzed by RNA sequencing and 5 of them were detected with TFEB-associated gene fusions, including 2 ACTB-TFEB, 1 EWSR1-TFEB, 1 CLTC-TFEB, and 1 potential PPP1R10-TFEB (a paracentric inversion of the TFEB gene, consistent with "negative" TFEB split FISH result, and advising a potential diagnostic pitfall in detecting TFEB gene rearrangement). Four of the 5 fusion transcripts were successfully validated by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction and Sanger sequencing. Morphologically, approximately one third (29%, 9/31) of TFEB RCCs showed typical biphasic morphology. The remaining two thirds of the cases (71%, 22/31) exhibited nonspecific morphology, with nested, sheet-like, or papillary architecture, resembling other types of renal neoplasms, such as clear cell RCC, Xp11 RCC, perivascular epithelioid cell tumor (PEComa), or papillary RCC. Although cases bearing a MALAT1-TFEB fusion demonstrated variable morphologies, all 9 cases featuring typical biphasic morphology were associated with MALAT1-TFEB genotype. Accordingly, typical biphasic morphology suggests MALAT1-TFEB fusion, whereas atypical morphology did not suggest the specific type of fusion. Isolated or clustered eosinophilic cells were a common feature in TFEB RCCs, which may be a useful morphology diagnostic clue for TFEB RCCs. Clinicopathologic variables assessment showed that necrosis was the only morphologic feature that correlated with the aggressive behavior of TFEB RCC (P=0.004). In summary, our study expands the genomic spectrum and the clinicopathologic features of TFEB RCCs, and highlights the challenges of diagnosis and the importance of subtyping of this tumor by combining morphology and multiple molecular techniques.

TFEB Modulates p21/WAF1/CIP1 during the DNA Damage Response

The MiT/TFE family of transcription factors (MITF, TFE3, and TFEB), which control transcriptional programs for autophagy and lysosome biogenesis have emerged as regulators of energy metabolism in cancer. Thus, their activation increases lysosomal catabolic function to sustain cancer cell growth and survival in stress conditions. Here, we found that TFEB depletion dramatically reduces basal expression levels of the cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) inhibitor p21/WAF1 in various cell types. Conversely, TFEB overexpression increases p21 in a p53-dependent manner. Furthermore, induction of DNA damage using doxorubicin induces TFEB-mediated activation of p21, delays G2/M phase arrest, and promotes cell survival. Pharmacological inhibition of p21, instead, abrogates TFEB-mediated protection during the DNA damage response. Together, our findings uncover a novel and direct role of TFEB in the regulation of p21 expression in both steady-state conditions and during the induction of DNA-damage response (DDR). Our observations might open novel therapeutic strategies to promote cancer cell death by targeting the TFEB-p21 pathway in the presence of genotoxic agents.

TFEB Expression Profiling in Renal Cell Carcinomas: Clinicopathologic Correlations

TFEB is overexpressed in TFEB-rearranged renal cell carcinomas as well as in renal tumors with amplifications of TFEB at 6p21.1. As recent literature suggests that renal tumors with 6p21.1 amplification behave more aggressively than those with rearrangements of TFEB, we compared relative TFEB gene expression in these tumors. This study included 37 TFEB-altered tumors: 15 6p21.1-amplified and 22 TFEB-rearranged (including 5 cases from The Cancer Genome Atlas data set). TFEB status was verified using a combination of fluorescent in situ hybridization (n=27) or comprehensive molecular profiling (n=13) and digital droplet polymerase chain reaction was used to quantify TFEB mRNA expression in 6p21.1-amplified (n=9) and TFEB-rearranged renal tumors (n=19). These results were correlated with TFEB immunohistochemistry. TFEB-altered tumors had higher TFEB expression when normalized to B2M (mean: 168.9%, n=28), compared with non-TFEB-altered controls (mean: 7%, n=18, P=0.005). Interestingly, TFEB expression in tumors with rearrangements (mean: 224.7%, n=19) was higher compared with 6p21.1-amplified tumors (mean: 51.2%, n=9; P=0.06). Of note, classic biphasic morphology was only seen in TFEB-rearranged tumors and when present correlated with 6.8-fold higher TFEB expression (P=0.00004). Our results suggest that 6p21.1 amplified renal tumors show increased TFEB gene expression but not as much as t(6;11) renal tumors. These findings correlate with the less consistent/diffuse expression of downstream markers of TFEB activation (cathepsin K, melan A, HMB45) seen in the amplified neoplasms. This suggests that the aggressive biological behavior of 6p21.1 amplified renal tumors might be secondary to other genes at the 6p21.1 locus that are co-amplified, such as VEGFA and CCND3, or other genetic alterations.

Histological and molecular characterization of TFEB-rearranged renal cell carcinomas

The 2016 WHO Classification of Tumors of the Urinary System recognizes microphthalmia transcription factor (MiT) family translocation carcinomas as a separate entity among renal cell carcinomas. TFE3 and transcription factor EB (TFEB) are members of the MiT family for which chromosomal rearrangements have been associated with renal cell carcinoma formation. TFEB translocation renal cell carcinoma is a rare tumor harboring a t(6;11)(p21;q12) translocation. Recently, renal cell carcinomas with TFEB amplification have been identified. TFEB amplified renal cell carcinomas have to be distinguished from TFEB-translocated renal cancer, because they may demonstrate a more aggressive behavior. Herein, we present a TFEB-translocated and a TFEB-amplified carcinoma cases and describe their distinct histological, immunohistochemical, and molecular characteristics. In addition, we review conventional morphology, immunophenotype, genetic background, and clinical outcome of TFEB-rearranged RCCs in the literature, with a special emphasis on important differential diagnoses and the diagnostic approach.

Downregulation of transcription factor EB inhibits the growth and metastasis of colorectal carcinomas

To determine the roles of transcription factor EB (TFEB) in colorectal cancer (CRC), we collected samples of tumor tissues and normal tissues from 40 patients with CRC. The expression of TFEB in these samples was analyzed by using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) and Western blot. Furthermore, we explored the expression of TFEB mRNA in CCD-18Co normal cells and HT-29, HCT-8, C2BBe1 cancer cells. HT-29, HCT-8, and C2BBe1 cancer cells were transfected with a TFEB-specific small interference RNA (siRNA) and scrambled siRNA, then the TFEB expression was confirmed by Western blot. The migration and invasion abilities of cells transfected with TFEB-siRNA were examined by transwell method and wound-healing assay. The subsequent effect of TFEB silencing on the tumor growth was also detected in mice xenograft model in vivo. Our study found that TFEB expression was significantly increased ( P < 0.05) in colorectal tumor tissues compared with normal tissues. Consistent with TFEB expression in tissues, compared with the normal CCD-18Co cells, TFEB mRNA expression was also significantly augmented in CRC cells. TFEB protein expression was markedly reduced in HT-29, HCT-8, and C2BBe1 cells after TFEB-siRNA transfection. In addition, inhibition of TFEB expression resulted in decrease of cells migration and invasion abilities. In vivo study, compared with the negative control group, the tumor weight, and volume were also reduced after inhibiting the TFEB expression. Our research suggested that TFEB expression is related to the occurrence and development of colorectal adenocarcinoma. The migration and invasion abilities of cancer cells, the weight and volume of tumor were all decreased when inhibiting TFEB expression. Thus, TFEB serves as an important factor in the development of CRC by modulating cancer cell migration and invasion, showing the potential therapeutic target of CRC in clinical.

t(6;11) renal cell carcinoma: a study of seven cases including two with aggressive behavior, and utility of CD68 (PG-M1) in the differential diagnosis with pure epithelioid PEComa/epithelioid angiomyolipoma

Renal cell carcinomas with t(6;11) chromosome translocation involving the TFEB gene are indolent neoplasms which often occur in young patients. In this study, we report seven cases of renal cell carcinoma with TFEB rearrangement, two of whom had histologically proven metastasis. Patients (4F, 3M) ranged in age from 19 to 55 years (mean 37). One patient developed paratracheal and pleural metastases 24 months after surgery and died of disease after 46 months; another one recurred with neoplastic nodules in the perinephric fat and pelvic soft tissue. Histologically, either cytological or architectural appearance was peculiar in each case whereas one tumor displayed the typical biphasic morphology. By immunohistochemistry, all tumors labelled for cathepsin K, Melan-A and CD68 (KP1 clone). HMB45 and PAX8 staining were detected in six of seven tumors. All tumors were negative for CD68 (PG-M1 clone), CKAE1-AE3, CK7, CAIX, and AMACR. Seven pure epithelioid PEComa/epithelioid angiomyolipomas, used as control, were positive for cathepsin K, melanocytic markers, and CD68 (PG-M1 and KP1) and negative for PAX8. Fluorescence in situ hybridization results showed the presence of TFEB gene translocation in all t(6;11) renal cell carcinomas with a high frequency of split TFEB fluorescent signals (mean 74%). In the primary and metastatic samples of the two aggressive tumors, increased gene copy number was observed (3-5 fluorescent signals per neoplastic nuclei) with a concomitant increased number of CEP6. Review of the literature revealed older age and larger tumor size as correlating with aggressive behavior in these neoplasms. In conclusion, we present the clinical, morphological and molecular features of seven t(6;11) renal cell carcinomas, two with histologically demonstrated metastasis. We report the high frequency of split signals by FISH in tumors with t(6;11) chromosomal rearrangement and the occurrence of TFEB gene copy number gains in the aggressive cases, analyzing either the primary or metastatic tumor. Finally, we demonstrate the usefulness of CD68 (PG-M1) immunohistochemical staining in distinguishing t(6;11) renal cell carcinoma from pure epithelioid PEComa/epithelioid angiomyolipoma.

Detection of 6 TFEB-amplified renal cell carcinomas and 25 renal cell carcinomas with MITF translocations: systematic morphologic analysis of 85 cases evaluated by clinical TFE3 and TFEB FISH assays

Renal cell carcinomas with MITF aberrations demonstrate a wide morphologic spectrum, highlighting the need to consider these entities within the differential diagnosis of renal tumors encountered in clinical practice. Herein, we describe our experience with application of clinical fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) assays for detection of TFE3 and TFEB gene aberrations from 85 consecutive renal cell carcinoma cases submitted to our genitourinary FISH service. Results from 170 FISH assays performed on these tumors were correlated with available clinicopathologic findings. Ninety-eight percent of renal tumors submitted for FISH evaluation were from adult patients. Thirty-one (37%) tumors were confirmed to demonstrate MITF aberrations (21 TFE3 translocation, 4 TFEB translocation, and 6 TFEB amplification cases). Overall, renal cell carcinomas with MITF aberrations demonstrated morphologic features overlapping with clear cell, papillary, or clear cell papillary renal cell carcinomas. Renal cell carcinomas with MITF aberrations were significantly more likely to demonstrate dual (eosinophilic and clear) cytoplasmic tones (P=0.030), biphasic TFEB translocation renal cell carcinoma-like morphology (P=0.002), psammomatous calcifications (P=0.002), and nuclear pseudoinclusions (P=0.001) than renal cell carcinomas without MITF aberrations. Notably, 7/9 (78%) renal cell carcinomas exhibiting subnuclear clearing and linear nuclear array (6 of which showed high World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology nucleolar grade) demonstrated TFE3 translocation, an association that was statistically significant when compared with renal cell carcinomas without MITF aberrations (P=0.009). In this cohort comprising consecutive cases, TFEB-amplified renal cell carcinomas were more commonly identified than renal cell carcinomas with TFEB translocations, and four (67%) of these previously unreported TFEB-amplified renal cell carcinomas demonstrated oncocytic and papillary features with a high World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology nucleolar grade. In summary, TFE3 and TFEB FISH evaluation aids in identification and accurate classification of renal cell carcinomas with MITF aberrations, including TFEB-amplified renal cell carcinoma, which may demonstrate aggressive behavior.

The MiTF/TFE Family of Transcription Factors: Master Regulators of Organelle Signaling, Metabolism, and Stress Adaptation

The microphthalmia family (MITF, TFEB, TFE3, and TFEC) of transcription factors is emerging as global regulators of cancer cell survival and energy metabolism, both through the promotion of lysosomal genes as well as newly characterized targets, such as oxidative metabolism and the oxidative stress response. In addition, MiT/TFE factors can regulate lysosomal signaling, which includes the mTORC1 and Wnt/β-catenin pathways, which are both substantial contributors to oncogenic signaling. This review describes recent discoveries in MiT/TFE research and how they impact multiple cancer subtypes. Furthermore, the literature relating to TFE-fusion proteins in cancers and the potential mechanisms through which these genomic rearrangements promote tumorigenesis is reviewed. Likewise, the emerging function of the Folliculin (FLCN) tumor suppressor in negatively regulating the MiT/TFE family and how loss of this pathway promotes cancer is examined. Recent reports are also presented that relate to the role of MiT/TFE-driven lysosomal biogenesis in sustaining cancer cell metabolism and signaling in nutrient-limiting conditions. Finally, a discussion is provided on the future directions and unanswered questions in the field. In summary, the research surrounding the MiT/TFE family indicates that these transcription factors are promising therapeutic targets and biomarkers for cancers that thrive in stressful niches. Mol Cancer Res; 15(12); 1637-43. ©2017 AACR.

Renal Cell Carcinoma With Chromosome 6p Amplification Including the TFEB Gene: A Novel Mechanism of Tumor Pathogenesis?

Amplification of chromosome 6p has been implicated in aggressive behavior in several cancers, but has not been characterized in renal cell carcinoma (RCC). We identified 9 renal tumors with amplification of chromosome 6p including the TFEB gene, 3 by fluorescence in situ hybridization, and 6 from the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) databases. Patients' ages were 28 to 78 years (median, 61 y). Most tumors were high stage (7/9 pT3a, 2/9 pN1). Using immunohistochemistry, 2/4 were positive for melanocytic markers and cathepsin K. Novel TFEB fusions were reported by TCGA in 2; however, due to a small composition of fusion transcripts compared with full-length transcripts (0.5/174 and 3.3/132 FPKM), we hypothesize that these represent secondary fusions due to amplification. Five specimens (4 TCGA, 1 fluorescence in situ hybridization) had concurrent chromosome 3p copy number loss or VHL deletion. However, these did not resemble clear cell RCC, had negative carbonic anhydrase IX labeling, lacked VHL mutation, and had papillary or unclassified histology (2/4 had gain of chromosome 7 or 17). One tumor each had somatic FH mutation and SMARCB1 mutation. Chromosome 6p amplification including TFEB is a previously unrecognized cytogenetic alteration in RCC, associated with heterogenous tubulopapillary eosinophilic and clear cell histology. The combined constellation of features does not fit cleanly into an existing tumor category (unclassified), most closely resembling papillary or translocation RCC. The tendency for high tumor stage, varied tubulopapillary morphology, and a subset with melanocytic marker positivity suggests the possibility of a unique tumor type, despite some variation in appearance and genetics.