Advances In Anatomic Pathology最新文献

We review the time honored but still frequently challenging features of ovarian sex cord-stromal tumors and also emphasize new developments, including unusual morphologic appearances that, despite the relative rarity of many of the tumors, result in a disproportionate number of differential diagnostic problems, variant immunohistochemical profiles, and specific molecular and syndromic associations. These neoplasms are also of historical interest as current knowledge is still based in significant part to the contributions of 2 giants of gynecologic pathology, Dr Robert Meyer and Dr. Robert E. Scully. In part I, we reviewed the pure ovarian stromal tumors. Now, in part II, we present the major clinical, pathologic, and genomic features of pure sex cord and sex cord-stromal tumors.

The most common neuroendocrine tumor in the urinary bladder is small cell carcinoma, which can be pure or mixed with components of urothelial or other histologic subtypes. Large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma of the bladder is rare and remains ill-defined but is increasingly recognized. Well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumor and paraganglioma can arise in the bladder but are very rare in this location. Recent advances in molecular characterization allowed for better classification and may offer improved stratification of these tumors.

Bladder cancer may be classified into "molecular subtypes" based on gene expression. These are associated with treatment response and patient outcomes. The gene expression signatures that define these subtypes are diverse, including signatures of epithelial differentiation, stromal involvement, cell cycle activity, and immune cell infiltration. Multiple different systems are described. While earlier studies considered molecular subtypes to be intrinsic properties of cancer, recent data have shown molecular subtypes change as tumors progress and evolve, and often differ between histologically distinct regions of a tumor. The data also indicate that some signatures that define molecular subtypes may be treated as independent continuous variables, rather than categorical subtypes, and these individual signatures may be more clinically informative. This review describes molecular subtypes of urothelial carcinoma, including histologic subtypes and tumors with divergent differentiation, and explores potential future uses in patient management.

The diagnosis and reporting of prostatic adenocarcinoma have evolved from the classic framework promulgated by Dr Donald Gleason in the 1960s into a complex and nuanced system of grading and reporting that nonetheless retains the essence of his remarkable observations. The criteria for the "Gleason patterns" originally proposed have been continually refined by consensuses in the field, and Gleason scores have been stratified into a patient-friendly set of prognostically validated and widely adopted Grade Groups. One product of this successful grading approach has been the opportunity for pathologists to report diagnoses that signal carefully personalized management, placing the surgical pathologist's interpretation at the center of patient care. At one end of the continuum of disease aggressiveness, personalized diagnostic care means to sub-stratify patients with more indolent disease for active surveillance, while at the other end of the continuum, reporting histologic markers signaling aggression allows sub-stratification of clinically significant disease. Whether contemporary reporting parameters represent deeper nuances of more established ones (eg, new criteria and/or quantitation of Gleason patterns 4 and 5) or represent additional features reported alongside grade (intraductal carcinoma, cribriform patterns of carcinoma), assessment and grading have become more complex and demanding. Herein, we explore these newer reporting parameters, highlighting the state of knowledge regarding morphologic, molecular, and management aspects. Emphasis is made on the increasing value and stakes of histopathologists' interpretations and reporting into current clinical risk stratification and treatment guidelines.

The current WHO classification of testicular germ cell tumors is based on the pathogenesis of the tumors driven by different genomic events. The germ cell neoplasia in situ is the precursor lesion for all malignant germ cell tumors. The current understanding of pathogenesis is that the developmental and environmental factors with the erasure of parental genomic imprinting lead to the development of abnormal gonocytes that settle in the "spermatogonial Niche" in seminiferous tubules. The abnormal primordial germ cells in the seminiferous tubules give rise to pre-GCNIS cells under the influence of TPSY and OCT4 genes. The whole genome duplication events give rise to germ cell neoplasia in situ, which further acquires alterations in 12p along with NRAS and KRAS mutations to produce seminoma. A subset of seminomas acquires KIT mutation and does not differentiate further. The remaining KIT-stable seminomas differentiate to nonseminomatous GCTs after obtaining recurrent chromosomal losses, epigenetic modification, and posttranscriptional regulation by multiple genes. Nonseminomatous germ cell tumors also develop directly from differentiated germ cell neoplasia in situ. TP53 pathway with downstream drivers may give rise to somatic-type malignancies of GCT. The GCTs are remarkably sensitive to cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy; however, resistance to cisplatin develops in up to 8% of tumors and appears to be driven by TP53/MDM2 gene mutations. Serum and Plasma miRNAs show promise in diagnosing, managing, and following up on these tumors. The mechanisms underlying the development of most tumors have been elucidated; however, additional studies are required to pinpoint the events directing specific characteristics. Advances in identifying specific molecular markers have been seen recently and may be adopted as gold standards in the future.

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 NKX3.1 immunohistochemical stain is widely recognized as a highly sensitive and specific marker for prostate adenocarcinoma. Nevertheless, its expression has been documented in various nonprostatic tissues and malignancies. This review aims to provide an overview of NKX3.1 expression in diverse tumor types, with a specific focus on its aberrant expression in esophageal/gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (E/GE-ADC). In our investigation, we explored the expression of NKX3.1 in a series of E/GE-ADC to shed light on its prevalence in this tumor category. A total of 50 samples, comprising primary and metastatic E/GE-ADC specimens from 34 patients, were subjected to immunohistochemical analysis. Stained sections were scored based on the intensity and distribution-categorized as negative, weak, moderate, or strong in either a focal or diffuse pattern. Strong staining corresponds to the intensity observed in normal prostate controls, while focal and diffuse staining denote <50% and ≥50% of tumor nuclei staining positive, respectively. Our semiquantitative scoring revealed that 6 (12%) of the primary and metastatic E/GE-ADC specimens exhibited variable positivity for NKX3.1. This finding suggests that E/GE-ADC can sporadically stain positive for NKX3.1, introducing potential challenges in definitively determining the primary site of origin in certain clinical scenarios. Along with a literature review of NKX3.1 expression in other tumor types, our study provides additional important information about the extent to which this immunostain can be seen in E/GE-ADCs, which, to our knowledge, has not been reported.