No abstract

Five years after the last prostatic carcinoma grading consensus conference of the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP), accrual of new data and modification of clinical practice require an update of current pathologic grading guidelines. This manuscript summarizes the proceedings of the ISUP consensus meeting for grading of prostatic carcinoma held in September 2019, in Nice, France. Topics brought to consensus included the following: (1) approaches to reporting of Gleason patterns 4 and 5 quantities, and minor/tertiary patterns, (2) an agreement to report the presence of invasive cribriform carcinoma, (3) an agreement to incorporate intraductal carcinoma into grading, and (4) individual versus aggregate grading of systematic and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging-targeted biopsies. Finally, developments in the field of artificial intelligence in the grading of prostatic carcinoma and future research perspectives were discussed.

Patients with germline mutation of succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) subunit genes are prone to develop paraganglioma, gastrointestinal stromal tumor, and rarely renal cell carcinoma (RCC). However, SDH-deficient RCC is not yet widely recognized. We identified such tumors by distinctive morphology and confirmed absence of immunohistochemical staining for SDHB. Immunohistochemical features were evaluated using a panel of antibodies to renal tumor antigens. Targeted next-generation sequencing was performed on DNA extracted from paraffin-embedded tissue. Eleven tumors were identified from 10 patients, 22-72 years of age (median 40). Two patients had paragangliomas, 1 bilateral SDH-deficient RCC, and 1 contralateral oncocytoma. Grossly, tumors were tan or red-brown, 2-20 cm in diameter (median 4.25 cm). Fuhrman grade was 2 (n ¼ 10) or 3 (n ¼ 1). Stage was pT1a-pT2b. One patient developed widespread metastases 16 years after nephrectomy and died of disease 6 years later. All tumors were composed of uniform eosinophilic cells containing vacuoles or flocculent cytoplasmic inclusions. Architecture was primarily solid; entrapped renal tubules and intratumoral mast cells were common. By immunohistochemistry, tumor cells were negative for SDHB (11/11) and rarely SDHA (1/11). Labeling was uniformly positive for PAX8 and kidney-specific cadherin and absent for KIT, RCC, and carbonic anhydrase IX. Staining for broad-spectrum epithelial markers was often negative or focal (positive staining for AE1/AE3 in 4/10, CAM5.2 3/7, CK7 1/11, EMA 10/10). By sequencing, SDHB mutation and loss of the second allele were present in 5/6 tumors; the SDHA-deficient tumor showed no SDHB abnormality. SDH-deficient RCC is a unique neoplasm that is capable of progression, often harboring SDHB mutation. A monomorphic oncocytic renal tumor with solid architecture, cytoplasmic inclusions of flocculent material, and intratumoral mast cells should prompt evaluation of SDH status, as it may have implications for screening the patient and relatives. Negative immunohistochemistry for KIT and heterogeneous labeling for epithelial antigens are other supportive features.

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) associated with Xp11.2 translocation is uncommon, characterized by several different translocations involving the TFE3 gene. We assessed the utility of break-apart fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) in establishing the diagnosis for suspected or unclassified cases with negative or equivocal TFE3 immunostaining by analyzing 24 renal cancers with break-apart TFE3 FISH and comparing the molecular findings with the results of TFE3 and cathepsin K immunostaining in the same tumors. Ten tumors were originally diagnosed as Xp11.2 RCC on the basis of positive TFE3 immunostaining, and 14 were originally considered unclassified RCCs with negative or equivocal TFE3 staining, but with a range of features suspicious for Xp11.2 RCC. Seventeen cases showed TFE3 rearrangement associated with Xp11.2 translocation by FISH, including all 13 tumors with moderate or strong TFE3 (n=10) or cathepsin K (n=7) immunoreactivity. FISH-positive cases showed negative or equivocal immunoreactivity for TFE3 or cathepsin K in 7 and 10 tumors, respectively (both=3). None had positive immunohistochemistry but negative FISH. Morphologic features were typical for Xp11.2 RCC in 10/17 tumors. Unusual features included 1 melanotic Xp11.2 renal cancer, 1 tumor with mixed features of Xp11.2 RCC and clear cell RCC, and other tumors mimicking clear cell RCC, multilocular cystic RCC, or high-grade urothelial carcinoma. Morphology mimicking high-grade urothelial carcinoma has not been previously reported in these tumors. Psammoma bodies, hyalinized stroma, and intracellular pigment were preferentially identified in FISH-positive cases compared with FISH-negative cases. Our results support the clinical application of a TFE3 break-apart FISH assay for diagnosis and confirmation of Xp11.2 RCC and further expand the histopathologic spectrum of these neoplasms to include tumors with unusual features. A renal tumor with pathologic or clinical features highly suggestive of translocation-associated RCC but exhibiting negative or equivocal TFE3 immunostaining should be evaluated by TFE3 FISH assay to fully assess this possibility.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Since the last World Health Organization (WHO) classification scheme for tumours of the urinary tract and male genital organs, there have been a number of advances in the understanding, classification, immunohistochemistry and genetics of testicular germ cell tumours. The updated 2016 draft classification was discussed at an International Society of Urological Pathology Consultation on Testicular and Penile Cancer. This review addresses the main updates to germ cell tumour classification. Major changes include a pathogenetically derived classification using germ cell neoplasia in situ (GCNIS) as a new name for the precursor lesion, and the distinction of prepubertal tumours (non-GCNIS-derived) from postpubertal-type tumours (GCNIS-derived), acknowledging the existence of rare benign prepubertal-type teratomas in the postpubertal testis. Spermatocytic tumour is adopted as a replacement for spermatocytic seminoma, to avoid potential confusion with the unrelated usual seminoma. The spectrum of trophoblastic tumours arising in the setting of testicular germ cell tumour continues to expand, to include epithelioid and placental site trophoblastic tumours analogous to those of the gynaecological tract. Currently, reporting of anaplasia (seminoma or spermatocytic tumour) or immaturity (teratoma) is not required, as these do not have demonstrable prognostic importance. In contrast, overgrowth of a teratomatous component (somatic-type malignancy) and sarcomatous change in spermatocytic tumour indicate more aggressive behaviour, and should be reported.