- Browse by Author
Browsing by Author "Zhou, Ming"
Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Diagnostic Criteria for Oncocytic Renal Neoplasms: A Survey of Urologic Pathologists(Elsevier, 2017-05) Williamson, Sean R.; Gadde, Ramya; Trpkov, Kiril; Hirsch, Michelle S.; Srigley, John R.; Reuter, Victor E.; Cheng, Liang; Kunju, L. Priya; Barod, Ravi; Rogers, Craig G.; Delahunt, Brett; Hes, Ondrej; Eble, John N.; Zhou, Ming; McKenney, Jesse K.; Martignoni, Guido; Fleming, Stewart; Grignon, David J.; Moch, Holger; Gupta, Nilesh S.; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, IU School of MedicineRenal oncocytoma and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma have been long recognized as distinct tumors; however, it remains unknown if uniform diagnostic criteria are used to distinguish these tumor types in practice. A survey was distributed to urologic pathologists regarding oncocytic tumors. Responses were received from 17 of 26 invitees. Histologically, more than 1 mitotic figure was regarded as most worrisome (n = 10) or incompatible (n = 6) with oncocytoma diagnosis. Interpretation of focal nuclear wrinkling, focal perinuclear clearing, and multinucleation depended on extent and did not necessarily exclude oncocytoma if minor. Staining techniques most commonly used included the following: cytokeratin 7 (94%), KIT (71%), vimentin (65%), colloidal iron (59%), CD10 (53%), and AMACR (41%). Rare cytokeratin 7–positive cells (≤5%) were regarded as most supportive of oncocytoma, although an extent excluding oncocytoma was not universal. Multiple chromosomal losses were most strongly supportive for chromophobe renal cell carcinoma diagnosis (65%). Less certainty was reported for chromosomal gain or a single loss. For tumors with mixed or inconclusive features, many participants use an intermediate diagnostic category (82%) that does not label the tumor as unequivocally benign or malignant, typically “oncocytic neoplasm” or “tumor” with comment. The term “hybrid tumor” was used variably in several scenarios. A slight majority (65%) report outright diagnosis of oncocytoma in needle biopsies. The morphologic, immunohistochemical, and genetic characteristics that define oncocytic renal tumors remain incompletely understood. Further studies correlating genetics, behavior, and histology are needed to define which tumors truly warrant classification as carcinomas for patient counseling and follow-up strategies.Item Evidence for Polyclonal Origin of Multifocal Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma(American Association of Cancer Research, 2008-12) Cheng, Liang; MacLennan, Gregory T.; Zhang, Shaobo; Wang, Mingsheng; Zhou, Ming; Tan, Puay-Hoon; Foster, Stephanie; Lopez-Beltran, Antonio; Montironi, Rodolfo; Urology, School of MedicinePurpose: Renal cell carcinomas are often multifocal. We investigated the genomic signatures of multifocal clear cell renal cell carcinoma to determine whether multiple tumors in the same kidney bear a clonal relationship to one another. Experimental Design: A total of 62 tumors from 26 patients who underwent radical nephrectomy were examined. All patients had multiple separate clear cell renal carcinomas. Loss of heterozygosity analyses were done using five microsatellite polymorphic markers that represent putative tumor suppressor genes on chromosome 3p14 (D3S1300), 7q31 (D7S522), 8p22 (D8S261), 9p21 (D9S171), and 17p13 (TP53). X chromosome inactivation analyses were also done on the renal tumors from the 10 female patients. Chromosome 3p deletion status was determined by dual color interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis in all tumors. Results: Nineteen of the 26 (73%) patients with multifocal clear cell renal cell carcinoma showed allelic loss in at least 1 of 5 microsatellite loci in separate tumors analyzed. A disconcordant pattern of allelic loss between coexisting kidney tumors was observed in 7 cases. Six cases showed discordant 3p deletion patterns by dual color interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis. Of the eight informative female cases studied by X chromosome inactivation, one showed a discordant nonrandom pattern of X chromosome inactivation. Overall, evidence of independent origin of the multifocal renal tumors was observed in 12 of 26 cases (46%). Conclusions: Our data suggest that in a significant number of cases of multifocal clear cell renal cell carcinoma, the spatially separate tumors are of different clonal origin and arise independently.Item Gleason Grade 4 Prostate Adenocarcinoma Patterns: An Inter-observer Agreement Study among Genitourinary Pathologists(Wiley, 2016-09) Kweldam, Charlotte F.; Nieboer, Daan; Algaba, Ferran; Amin, Mahul B.; Berney, Dan M.; Billis, Athanase; Bostwick, David G.; Bubendorf, Lukas; Cheng, Liang; Compérat, Eva; Delahunt, Brett; Egevad, Lars; Evans, Andrew J.; Hansel, Donna E.; Humphrey, Peter A.; Kristiansen, Glen; van der Kwast, Theodorus H.; Magi-Galluzzi, Cristina; Montironi, Rodolfo; Netto, George J.; Samaratunga, Hemamali; Srigley, John R.; Tan, Puay H.; Varma, Murali; Zhou, Ming; van Leenders, Geert J. L. H.; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, IU School of MedicineAims To assess the interobserver reproducibility of individual Gleason grade 4 growth patterns. Methods and results Twenty-three genitourinary pathologists participated in the evaluation of 60 selected high-magnification photographs. The selection included 10 cases of Gleason grade 3, 40 of Gleason grade 4 (10 per growth pattern), and 10 of Gleason grade 5. Participants were asked to select a single predominant Gleason grade per case (3, 4, or 5), and to indicate the predominant Gleason grade 4 growth pattern, if present. ‘Consensus’ was defined as at least 80% agreement, and ‘favoured’ as 60–80% agreement. Consensus on Gleason grading was reached in 47 of 60 (78%) cases, 35 of which were assigned to grade 4. In the 13 non-consensus cases, ill-formed (6/13, 46%) and fused (7/13, 54%) patterns were involved in the disagreement. Among the 20 cases where at least one pathologist assigned the ill-formed growth pattern, none (0%, 0/20) reached consensus. Consensus for fused, cribriform and glomeruloid glands was reached in 2%, 23% and 38% of cases, respectively. In nine of 35 (26%) consensus Gleason grade 4 cases, participants disagreed on the growth pattern. Six of these were characterized by large epithelial proliferations with delicate intervening fibrovascular cores, which were alternatively given the designation fused or cribriform growth pattern (‘complex fused’). Conclusions Consensus on Gleason grade 4 growth pattern was predominantly reached on cribriform and glomeruloid patterns, but rarely on ill-formed and fused glands. The complex fused glands seem to constitute a borderline pattern of unknown prognostic significance on which a consensus could not be reached.Item Handling and reporting of orchidectomy specimens with testicular cancer: areas of consensus and variation among 25 experts and 225 European pathologists(Wiley, 2015-09) Berney, Daniel M.; Algaba, Ferran; Amin, Mahul; Delahunt, Brett; Compérat, Eva; Epstein, Jonathan I.; Humphrey, Peter; Idrees, Mohammed; Lopez-Beltran, Antonio; Magi-Galluzzi, Cristina; Mikuz, Gregor; Montironi, Rodolfo; Oliva, Esther; Srigley, John; Reuter, Victor E.; Trpkov, Kiril; Ulbright, Thomas M.; Varma, Murali; Verrill, Clare; Young, Robert H.; Zhou, Ming; Egevad, Lars; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, IU School of MedicineThe handling and reporting of testicular tumours is difficult due to their rarity. METHODS AND RESULTS: A survey developed by the European Network of Uro-Pathology (ENUP) and sent to its members and experts to assess the evaluation of testicular germ cell tumours. Twenty-five experts and 225 ENUP members replied. Areas of disagreement included immaturity in teratomas, reported by 32% of experts but 68% of ENUP. Although the presence of rete testis invasion was reported widely, the distinction between pagetoid and stromal invasion was made by 96% of experts but only 63% of ENUP. Immunohistochemistry was used in more than 50% of cases by 68% of ENUP and 12% of experts. Staging revealed the greatest areas of disagreement. Invasion of the tunica vaginalis without vascular invasion was interpreted as T1 by 52% of experts and 67% of ENUP, but T2 by the remainder. Tumour invading the hilar adipose tissue adjacent to the epididymis without vascular invasion was interpreted as T1: 40% of experts, 43% of ENUP; T2: 36% of experts, 30% of ENUP; and T3: 24% of experts, 27% of ENUP. CONCLUSIONS: There is remarkable consensus in many areas of testicular pathology. Significant areas of disagreement included staging and reporting of histological types, both of which have the potential to impact on therapyItem New developments in existing WHO entities and evolving molecular concepts: The Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) update on renal neoplasia(Elsevier, 2021) Trpkov, Kiril; Hes, Ondrej; Williamson, Sean R.; Adeniran, Adebowale J.; Agaimy, Abbas; Alaghehbandan, Reza; Amin, Mahul B.; Argani, Pedram; Chen, Ying-Bei; Cheng, Liang; Epstein, Jonathan I.; Cheville, John C.; Comperat, Eva; Werneck da Cunha, Isabela; Gordetsky, Jennifer B.; Gupta, Sounak; He, Huiying; Hirsch, Michelle S.; Humphrey, Peter A.; Kapur, Payal; Kojima, Fumiyoshi; Lopez, Jose I.; Maclean, Fiona; Magi-Galluzzi, Cristina; McKenney, Jesse K.; Mehra, Rohit; Menon, Santosh; Netto, George J.; Przybycin, Christopher G.; Rao, Priya; Rao, Qiu; Reuter, Victor E.; Saleeb, Rola M.; Shah, Rajal B.; Smith, Steven C.; Tickoo, Satish; Tretiakova, Maria S.; True, Lawrence; Verkarre, Virginie; Wobker, Sara E.; Zhou, Ming; Gill, Anthony J.; Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, School of MedicineThe Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) reviewed recent advances in renal neoplasia, particularly post-2016 World Health Organization (WHO) classification, to provide an update on existing entities, including diagnostic criteria, molecular correlates, and updated nomenclature. Key prognostic features for clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remain WHO/ISUP grade, AJCC/pTNM stage, coagulative necrosis, and rhabdoid and sarcomatoid differentiation. Accrual of subclonal genetic alterations in clear cell RCC including SETD2, PBRM1, BAP1, loss of chromosome 14q and 9p are associated with variable prognosis, patterns of metastasis, and vulnerability to therapies. Recent National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines increasingly adopt immunotherapeutic agents in advanced RCC, including RCC with rhabdoid and sarcomatoid changes. Papillary RCC subtyping is no longer recommended, as WHO/ISUP grade and tumor architecture better predict outcome. New papillary RCC variants/patterns include biphasic, solid, Warthin-like, and papillary renal neoplasm with reverse polarity. For tumors with 'borderline' features between oncocytoma and chromophobe RCC, a term "oncocytic renal neoplasm of low malignant potential, not further classified" is proposed. Clear cell papillary RCC may warrant reclassification as a tumor of low malignant potential. Tubulocystic RCC should only be diagnosed when morphologically pure. MiTF family translocation RCCs exhibit varied morphologic patterns and fusion partners. TFEB-amplified RCC occurs in older patients and is associated with more aggressive behavior. Acquired cystic disease (ACD) RCC-like cysts are likely precursors of ACD-RCC. The diagnosis of renal medullary carcinoma requires a negative SMARCB1 (INI-1) expression and sickle cell trait/disease. Mucinous tubular and spindle cell carcinoma (MTSCC) can be distinguished from papillary RCC with overlapping morphology by losses of chromosomes 1, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 15, and 22. MTSCC with adverse histologic features shows frequent CDKN2A/2B (9p) deletions. BRAF mutations unify the metanephric family of tumors. The term "fumarate hydratase deficient RCC" ("FH-deficient RCC") is preferred over "hereditary leiomyomatosis and RCC syndrome-associated RCC". A low threshold for FH, 2SC, and SDHB immunohistochemistry is recommended in difficult to classify RCCs, particularly those with eosinophilic morphology, occurring in younger patients. Current evidence does not support existence of a unique tumor subtype occurring after chemotherapy/radiation in early childhood.Item Utility of Pathology Imagebase for Standardization of Prostate Cancer Grading(Wiley, 2018-07) Egevad, Lars; Delahunt, Brett; Berney, Dan M.; Bostwick, David G.; Cheville, John; Comperat, Eva; Evans, Andrew J.; Fine, Samson W.; Grignon, David J.; Humphrey, Peter A.; Hörnblad, Jonas; Iczkowski, Kenneth A.; Kench, James G.; Kristiansen, Glen; Leite, Katia R.M.; Magi-Galluzzi, Cristina; McKenney, Jesse; Oxley, Jon; Pan, Chin-Chen; Samaratunga, Hemamali; Srigley, John R.; Takahashi, Hiroyuki; True, Lawrence D.; Tsuzuki, Toyonori; van der Kwast, Theo; Varma, Murali; Zhou, Ming; Clements, Mark; Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, School of MedicineAims: Despite efforts to standardise grading of prostate cancer, even among experts there is still a considerable variation in grading practices. In this study we describe the use of Pathology Imagebase, a novel reference image library, for setting an international standard in prostate cancer grading. Methods and results: The International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) recently launched a reference image database supervised by experts. A panel of 24 international experts in prostate pathology reviewed independently microphotographs of 90 cases of prostate needle biopsies with cancer. A linear weighted kappa of 0.67 (95% confidence interval = 0.62-0.72) and consensus was reached in 50 cases. The interobserver weighted kappa varied from 0.48 to 0.89. The highest level of agreement was seen for Gleason score (GS) 3 + 3 = 6 (ISUP grade 1), while higher grades and particularly GS 4 + 3 = 7 (ISUP grade 3) showed considerable disagreement. Once a two-thirds majority was reached, images were moved automatically into a public database available for all ISUP members at www.isupweb.org. Non-members are able to access a limited number of cases. Conclusions: It is anticipated that the database will assist pathologists to calibrate their grading and, hence, decrease interobserver variability. It will also help to identify instances where definitions of grades need to be clarified.