Histopathologic subtype-specific genomic profiles of renal cell carcinomas identified by high-resolution whole-genome single nucleotide polymorphism array analysis

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

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

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

Although typically arranged in solid alveolar fashion, chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (RCC) may also show several other architectural growth patterns. We include in this series 8 chromophobe RCC cases with prominent papillary growth, a pattern very rarely reported or only mentioned as a feature of chromophobe RCC, which is lacking wider recognition The differential diagnosis of such cases significantly varies from the typical chromophobe RCC with its usual morphology, particularly its distinction from papillary RCC and other relevant and clinically important entities. Of 972 chromophobe RCCs in our files, we identified 8 chromophobe RCCs with papillary growth. We performed immunohistochemistry and array Comparative Genomic Hybridisation (aCGH) to investigate for possible chromosomal aberrations. Patients were 3 males and 5 females with age ranging from 30 to 84 years (mean 57.5, median 60 years). Tumor size was variable and ranged from 2 to 14 cm (mean 7.5, median 6.6 cm). Follow-up was available for 7 of 8 patients, ranging from 1 to 61 months (mean 20.1, median 12 months). Six patients were alive with no signs of aggressive behavior, and one died of the disease. Histologically, all cases were composed of dual cell population consisting of variable proportions of leaf-like cells with pale cytoplasm and eosinophilic cells. The extent of papillary component ranged from 15 to 100% of the tumor volume (mean 51%, median 50%). Sarcomatoid differentiation was identified only in the case with fatal outcome. Immunohistochemically, all tumors were positive for CK7, CD117 and Hale's Colloidal Iron. PAX8 was positive in 5 of 8 cases, TFE3 was focally positive 3 of 8 tumors, and Cathepsin K was focally positive in 2 of 8 tumors. All cases were negative for vimentin, AMACR and HMB45. Fumarate hydratase staining was retained in all tested cases. The proliferative activity was low (up to 1% in 7, up to 5% in one case). Three cases were successfully analyzed by aCGH and all showed a variable copy number variation profile with multiple chromosomal gains and losses. CONCLUSIONS: Chromophobe RCC demonstrating papillary architecture is an exceptionally rare carcinoma. The diagnosis can be challenging, although the cytologic features are consistent with the classic chromophobe RCC. Given the prognostic and therapeutic implications of accurately diagnosis other RCCs with papillary architecture (i.e., Xp11.2 translocation RCC, FH-deficient RCC), it is crucial to differentiate these cases from chromophobe RCC with papillary architecture. Based on this limited series, the presence of papillary architecture does not appear to have negative prognostic impact. However, its wider recognition may allow in depth studies on additional examples of this rare morphologic variant.

The current status of tailor-made medicine with molecular biomarkers for patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma

Appropriate use of multiple reliable molecular biomarkers in the right context will play a role in tailormade medicine of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients in the future. A total of 11,056 patients from 53 studies were included in this review. The article numbers of the each evidence levels, using the grading system defined by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine, in 1b, 2a, 2b, and 3b were 5 (9%), 18 (34%), 29 (55%), and 1 (2%), respectively. The main goal of using biomarkers is to refine predictions of tumor progression, pharmacotherapy responsiveness, and cancer-specific and/or overall survival. Currently, carbonic anhydrase (CA9) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in peripheral blood and p53 in tumor tissues are measured to predict metastasis, while VEGF-related proteins in peripheral blood are used to assess pharmacotherapy responsiveness with sunitinib. Furthermore, interleukin 8, osteopontin, hepatocyte growth factor, and tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases-1 in peripheral blood enable assessment of responsiveness to pazopanib treatment. Other reliable molecular biomarkers include von Hippel–Lindau gene alteration, hypoxia-inducible factor-1a, CA9, and survivin in tumor tissues and VEGF in peripheral blood for predicting cancer-specific survival. In the future, studies should undergo external validation for developing tailored management of clear cell RCC with molecular biomarkers, since individual institutional studies lack the generalization and consistency required to maintain accuracy among different patient series.

Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma--chromosomal aberration variability and its relation to Paner grading system: an array CGH and FISH analysis of 37 cases

Genetically, chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (ChRCC) is characterized by multiple chromosomal changes, especially losses. The most common losses include chromosomes 1, 2, 6, 10, 13, 17, and 21. The Fuhrman grading system lacks prognostic relevance for ChRCC, and recently, a new grading system for ChRCC was proposed by Paner. The objective of this study was to map the spectrum of chromosomal aberrations (extent and location) in a large cohort of ChRCCs and relate these findings to the Paner grading system (PGS). A large cohort of ChRCC was reviewed and graded according to the PGS. All the cases were reevaluated and separated into groups according to their PGS. The final study set was 37 patients. ChRCCs were divided into PG 1-3, sarcomatoid, and aggressive groups. "Aggressive ChRCCs" were designated cases with known metastatic activity, local recurrence, aggressive growth to the adjacent organs, or invasive growth into the renal sinus (with/without angioinvasion). Sarcomatoid tumors were divided into their epithelial and sarcomatoid component (further molecular genetic analyses were performed separately). Array comparative genome hybridization and/or fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis was applied to 42 samples from the 37 cases. Multiple losses, as well as gains, were detected in different chromosomes. Regardless of the PGS groups, the most frequently detected losses involved chromosomes 1 (27/37), 2 (26/37), 6 (23/37), 10 (26/37), 13 (19/37), and 17 (24/37). Loss of chromosome 21 was found in 12/37 cases. The most frequently detected gains were found on chromosomes 4 (22/37), 7 (24/37), 15 (20/37), 19 (22/37), and 20 (21/37). Cluster analysis showed that there is no relation between PGS and particular pattern of chromosomal changes (losses or gains) in ChRCCs. Conclusions are as follows: (1) ChRCCs showed a significantly broader spectrum of chromosomal aberrations than previously recognized. While previously published chromosomal losses were found in our cohort, gains of multiple chromosomes were also identified in a high percentage. The most frequently detected gains involved chromosomes 4, 7, 15, 19, and 20. (2) There is no relation between chromosomal numerical changes and Paner grading system.