Prostate cancer - major changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual.

Answer questions and earn CME/CNE The eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) Staging Manual has been updated and improved to ensure the highest degree of clinical relevance and to improve its utility for patient evaluation and clinical research. Major changes include: 1) pathologically organ-confined disease is now considered pT2 and is no longer subclassified by extent of involvement or laterality, 2) tumor grading now includes both the Gleason score (as in the seventh edition criteria) and the grade group (introduced in the eighth edition criteria), 3) prognostic stage group III includes select, organ-confined disease based on prostate-specific antigen and Gleason/grade group status, and 4) 2 statistical prediction models are included in the staging manual. The AJCC will continue to critically analyze emerging prostate cancer biomarkers and tools for their ability to prognosticate and guide treatment decision making with the highest level of accuracy and confidence for patients and physicians. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:245-253. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

The Eighth Edition AJCC Cancer Staging Manual: Continuing to build a bridge from a population-based to a more "personalized" approach to cancer staging.

The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging manual has become the benchmark for classifying patients with cancer, defining prognosis, and determining the best treatment approaches. Many view the primary role of the tumor, lymph node, metastasis (TNM) system as that of a standardized classification system for evaluating cancer at a population level in terms of the extent of disease, both at initial presentation and after surgical treatment, and the overall impact of improvements in cancer treatment. The rapid evolution of knowledge in cancer biology and the discovery and validation of biologic factors that predict cancer outcome and response to treatment with better accuracy have led some cancer experts to question the utility of a TNM-based approach in clinical care at an individualized patient level. In the Eighth Edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, the goal of including relevant, nonanatomic (including molecular) factors has been foremost, although changes are made only when there is strong evidence for inclusion. The editorial board viewed this iteration as a proactive effort to continue to build the important bridge from a "population-based" to a more "personalized" approach to patient classification, one that forms the conceptual framework and foundation of cancer staging in the era of precision molecular oncology. The AJCC promulgates best staging practices through each new edition in an effort to provide cancer care providers with a powerful, knowledge-based resource for the battle against cancer. In this commentary, the authors highlight the overall organizational and structural changes as well as "what's new" in the Eighth Edition. It is hoped that this information will provide the reader with a better understanding of the rationale behind the aggregate proposed changes and the exciting developments in the upcoming edition. CA Cancer J Clin 2017;67:93-99. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Current best practice for bladder cancer: a narrative review of diagnostics and treatments.

This Seminar presents the current best practice for the diagnosis and management of bladder cancer. The scope of this Seminar ranges from current challenges in pathology, such as the evolving histological and molecular classification of disease, to advances in personalised medicine and novel imaging approaches. We discuss the current role of radiotherapy, surgical management of non-muscle-invasive and muscle-invasive disease, highlight the challenges of treatment of metastatic bladder cancer, and discuss the latest developments in systemic therapy. This Seminar is intended to provide physicians with knowledge of current issues in bladder cancer.

Role of Surgical Pathologist for the Detection of Immuno-oncologic Predictive Factors in Non-small Cell Lung Cancers.

Until very recently, surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy have been the mainstay of treatment in non-small cell carcinomas (NSCLCs). However, recent advances in molecular immunology have unveiled some of the complexity of the mechanisms regulating cellular immune responses and led to the successful targeting of immune checkpoints in attempts to enhance antitumor T-cell responses. Immune checkpoint molecules such as cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein-4, programmed cell death protein-1, and programmed death ligand (PD-L) 1 have been shown to play central roles in evading cancer immunity. Thus, these molecules have been targeted by inhibitors for the management of cancers forming the basis of immunotherapy. Advanced NSCLC has been the paradigm for the benefits of immunotherapy in any cancer. Treatment decisions are made based on the expression of PD-L1 on the tumor cells and the presence or absence of driver mutations. Patients with high PD-L1 expression (≥50%) and no driver mutations are treated with single-agent immunotherapy whereas, for all other patients with a lower level of PD-L1 expression, a combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy is preferred. Thus, PD-L1 blockers are the only immunotherapeutic agents approved in advanced NSCLC without any oncogenic driver mutations. PD-L1 immunohistochemistry, however, may not be the best biomarker in view of its dynamic nature in time and space, and the benefits may be seen regardless of PD -L1 expression. Each immunotherapy molecule is prescribed based on the levels of PD-L1 expression as assessed by a Food and Drug Administration-approved companion diagnostic assay. Other biomarkers that have been studied include tumor mutational burden, the T-effector signature, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, radiomic assays, inflammation index, presence or absence of immune-related adverse events and specific driver mutations, and gut as well as local microbiome. At the current time, none of these biomarkers are routinely used in the clinical decision-making process for immunotherapy in NSCLC. However, in individual cases, they can be useful adjuncts to conventional therapy. This review describes our current understanding of the role of biomarkers as predictors of response to immune checkpoint molecules. To begin with a brief on cancer immunology in general and in NSCLC, in particular, is discussed. In the end, recent advancements in laboratory techniques for refining biomarker assays are described.

American Joint Committee on Cancer acceptance criteria for inclusion of risk models for individualized prognosis in the practice of precision medicine.

The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) has increasingly recognized the need for more personalized probabilistic predictions than those delivered by ordinal staging systems, particularly through the use of accurate risk models or calculators. However, judging the quality and acceptability of a risk model is complex. The AJCC Precision Medicine Core conducted a 2-day meeting to discuss characteristics necessary for a quality risk model in cancer patients. More specifically, the committee established inclusion and exclusion criteria necessary for a risk model to potentially be endorsed by the AJCC. This committee reviewed and discussed relevant literature before creating a checklist unique to this need of AJCC risk model endorsement. The committee identified 13 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria for AJCC risk model endorsement in cancer. The emphasis centered on performance metrics, implementation clarity, and clinical relevance. The facilitation of personalized probabilistic predictions for cancer patients holds tremendous promise, and these criteria will hopefully greatly accelerate this process. Moreover, these criteria might be useful for a general audience when trying to judge the potential applicability of a published risk model in any clinical domain. CA Cancer J Clin 2016;66:370-374. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Flat intraurothelial lesions of the urinary bladder-do hyperplasia, dysplasia, and atypia of unknown significance need to exist as diagnostic entities? and how to handle in routine clinical practice.

Classification of the putative flat preneoplastic and neoplastic lesions of the urothelium with features subthreshold for urothelial carcinoma in situ remains a challenging, indeed, vexing problem in diagnostic surgical pathology. This area, subtending lesions including flat urothelial hyperplasia, urothelial dysplasia, and atypia of unknown significance, has struggled under evolving classifications, changing criteria, and limited clinical actionability, all confounded by the recognized lack of diagnostic reproducibility. Herein, we review the state of the literature around these lesions, reviewing contemporary criteria and definitions, assessing the arguments in favor and against of retaining hyperplasia, dysplasia, and atypia of unknown significance as diagnostic entities. We clarify the intent of the original definitions for dysplasia as a lesion felt to be clearly neoplastic but with morphologic features that fall short of the threshold of urothelial carcinoma in situ. While several pathologists, including some experts in the field, conflate the term dysplasia with urothelial atypia of unknown significance, the latter is defined as a descriptive diagnosis term to express diagnostic uncertainty of a lesion of whether it is clearly reactive or neoplastic. Both molecular studies and clinical needs are considered, as we outline our approach on diagnosing each of these lesions in clinical practice. Recommendations are made to guide consistency and interoperability in future scholarship, and the place of these lesions in context of evolving trends in the field is considered.

Low grade oncocytic tumors of the kidney: a clinically relevant approach for the workup and accurate diagnosis.

Renal oncocytoma and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma were accepted as unique renal tumors in the late 1990s. Since their formal description, criteria for diagnosis have evolved and additional distinct tumor subtypes originally considered as one these two entities are now recognized. The last two decades have witnessed unprecedented interest in the spectrum of low grade oncocytic renal neoplasms in three specific areas: (1) histologic characterization of tumors with overlapping morphologic features between oncocytoma and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma; (2) description of potentially unique entities within this spectrum, such as eosinophilic vacuolated tumor and low-grade oncocytic tumor; and (3) better appreciation of the association between a subset of low grade oncocytic tumors and hereditary renal neoplasia. While this important work has been academically rewarding, the proposal of several histologic entities with overlapping morphologic and immunophenotypic features (which may require esoteric adjunctive immunohistochemical and/or molecular techniques for confirmation) has created frustration in the diagnostic pathology and urology community as information evolves regarding classification within this spectrum of renal neoplasia. Pathologists, including genitourinary subspecialists, are often uncertain as to the "best practice" diagnostic approach to such tumors. In this review, we present a practical clinically relevant algorithmic approach to classifying tumors within the low grade oncocytic family of renal neoplasia, including a proposal for compressing terminology for evolving categories where appropriate without sacrificing prognostic relevance.

Development and validation of a vascularity-based architectural classification for clear cell renal cell carcinoma: correlation with conventional pathological prognostic factors, gene expression patterns, and clinical outcomes.

The prognostic significance of an architectural grading system for clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) has recently been demonstrated. The present study aimed to establish a vascularity-based architectural classification using the cohort of 436 patients with localized ccRCC who underwent extirpative surgery and correlated the findings with conventional pathologic factors, gene expression, and prognosis. First, we assessed architectural patterns in the highest-grade area on hematoxylin and eosin-stained slides, then separately evaluated our surrogate score for vascularity. We grouped nine architectural patterns into three categories based on the vascular network score. "Vascularity-based architectural classification" was defined: category 1: characterized by enrichment of the vascular network, including compact/small nested, macrocyst/microcystic, and tubular/acinar patterns; category 2: characterized by a widely spaced-out vascular network, including alveolar/large nested, thick trabecular/insular, papillary/pseudopapillary patterns; category 3: characterized by scattered vascularity without a vascular network, including solid sheets, rhabdoid and sarcomatoid patterns. Adverse pathological prognostic factors such as TNM stage, WHO/ISUP grade, and necrosis were significantly associated with category 3, followed by category 2 (all p < 0.001). We successfully validated the classification using The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) cohort (n = 162), and RNA-sequencing data available from TCGA showed that the angiogenesis gene signature was significantly enriched in category 1 compared to categories 2 and 3, whereas the immune gene signature was significantly enriched in category 3 compared to categories 1 and 2. In univariate analysis, vascularity-based architectural classification showed the best accuracy in pathological prognostic factors for predicting recurrence-free survival (c-index = 0.786). The predictive accuracy of our model which integrated WHO/ISUP grade, necrosis, TNM stage, and vascularity-based architectural classification was greater than conventional risk models (c-index = 0.871 vs. 0.755-0.843). Our findings suggest that the vascularity-based architectural classification is prognostically useful and may help stratify patients appropriately for management based on their likelihood of post-surgical recurrence.

An introduction to the WHO 5th edition 2022 classification of testicular tumours.

The 5th edition of the World Health Organisation Blue Book was published recently and includes a comprehensive update on testicular tumours. This builds upon the work of the 4th edition, retaining its structure and main nomenclature, including the use of the term 'germ cell neoplasia in situ' (GCNIS) for the pre-invasive lesion of most germ cell tumours and division from those not derived from GCNIS. While there have been important developments in understanding the molecular underpinnings of testicular cancer, this updated classification paradigm and approach remains rooted in morphology. Nomenclature changes include replacement of the term 'primitive neuroectodermal tumour' by 'embryonic neuroectodermal tumour' based on the non-specificity of the former term and to separate these tumours clearly from Ewing sarcoma. Seminoma is placed in a germinoma family of tumours emphasising relation to those tumours at other sites. Criteria for the diagnosis of 'teratoma with somatic transformation' have been modified to not include variable field size assessments. The word 'carcinoid' has been changed to 'neuroendocrine tumour', with most examples in the testis now classified as 'prepubertal type testicular neuroendocrine tumour'. For sex cord-stromal tumours, the use of mitotic counts per high-power field has been changed to per mm2 for malignancy assessments, and the new entities, 'signet ring stromal tumour' and 'myoid gonadal stromal tumour', are defined. Well-differentiated papillary mesothelial tumour has now been defined as tumour type with a favourable prognosis. Sertoliform cystadenoma has been removed as an entity from testicular adnexal tumours and placed with Sertoli cell tumours.

WHO 2022 landscape of papillary and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma.

The 5th edition of the WHO Classification of Tumours of the Urinary and Male Genital Systems contains relevant revisions and introduces a group of molecularly defined renal tumour subtypes. Herein we present the World Health Organization (WHO) 2022 perspectives on papillary and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma with emphasis on their evolving classification, differential diagnosis, and emerging entities. The WHO 2022 classification eliminated the type 1/2 papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC) subcategorization, given the recognition of frequent mixed tumour phenotypes and the existence of entities with a different molecular background within the type 2 pRCC category. Additionally, emerging entities such as biphasic squamoid alveolar RCC, biphasic hyalinising psammomatous RCC, papillary renal neoplasm with reverse polarity, and Warthin-like pRCC are included as part of the pRCC spectrum, while additional morphological and molecular data are being gathered. In addition to oncocytomas and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (chRCC), a category of 'other oncocytic tumours' with oncocytoma/chRCC-like features has been introduced, including emerging entities, most with TSC/mTOR pathway alterations (eosinophilic vacuolated tumour and so-called 'low-grade' oncocytic tumour), deserving additional research. Eosinophilic solid and cystic RCC was accepted as a new and independent tumour entity. Finally, a highly reproducible and clinically relevant universal grading system for chRCC is still missing and is another niche of ongoing investigation. This review discusses these developments and highlights emerging morphological and molecular data relevant for the classification of renal cell carcinoma.

WHO Classification of Tumours fifth edition: evolving issues in the classification, diagnosis, and prognostication of prostate cancer.

The fifth edition of the WHO Classification of Tumours of the Urinary and Male Genital Systems encompasses several updates to the classification and diagnosis of prostatic carcinoma as well as incorporating advancements in the assessment of its prognosis, including recent grading modifications. Some of the salient aspects include: (1) recognition that prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN)-like carcinoma is not synonymous with a pattern of ductal carcinoma, but better classified as a subtype of acinar adenocarcinoma; (2) a specific section on treatment-related neuroendocrine prostatic carcinoma in view of the tight correlation between androgen deprivation therapy and the development of prostatic carcinoma with neuroendocrine morphology, and the emerging data on lineage plasticity; (3) a terminology change of basal cell carcinoma to "adenoid cystic (basal cell) cell carcinoma" given the presence of an underlying MYB::NFIB gene fusion in many cases; (4) discussion of the current issues in the grading of acinar adenocarcinoma and the prognostic significance of cribriform growth patterns; and (5) more detailed coverage of intraductal carcinoma of prostate (IDC-P) reflecting our increased knowledge of this entity, while recommending the descriptive term atypical intraductal proliferation (AIP) for lesions falling short of IDC-P but containing more atypia than typically seen in high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN). Lesions previously regarded as cribriform patterns of HGPIN are now included in the AIP category. This review discusses these developments, summarising the existing literature, as well as the emerging morphological and molecular data that underpins the classification and prognostication of prostatic carcinoma.

What's new in WHO fifth edition - urinary tract.

The fifth edition of the WHO Blue Book on urological tumours, specifically in the bladder chapter, represents a refinement and update in the classification of bladder tumours building on the aggregate major changes made in previous editions. Progress in the molecular underpinnings of urothelial tumours, particularly with promising stratifiers for more precision-based treatment approaches, have been made. Special attention has been paid to burning questions in bladder pathology, such as grading, heterogeneous lesions, inverted tumours and substaging. The concept of neuroendocrine tumours will be explained precisely.

Updates in Grading of Renal Cell Carcinomas Beyond Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma and Papillary Renal Cell Carcinoma.

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends grading of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and papillary RCC using the WHO/International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade, which is primarily based on nuclear features. As the spectrum of RCC continues to evolve, with more recently described subtypes in the past decade, literature evidence on grading these subtypes is limited or not available for some tumor types. Herein, we outline a pragmatic approach to the topic of grading RCC, dividing the contemporarily described RCC subtypes into 7 categories based on the potential clinical applicability of grading as a useful prognostic parameter: (1) RCC subtypes that are reasonably validated and recommended for WHO/ISUP grading; (2) RCC subtypes where WHO/ISUP is not applicable; (3) RCC subtypes where WHO/ISUP grading is potentially clinically useful; (4) inherently aggressive RCC subtypes where histologic classification itself confers an aggressive biologic potential; (5) renal epithelial tumors where WHO/ISUP grading provides potentially misleading prognostic implication; (6) renal epithelial neoplasms where low WHO/ISUP grade features are a prerequisite for accurate histologic classification; and (7) renal epithelial neoplasms with no or limited data on grading or incomplete understanding of the biologic potential. Our aim in outlining this approach is 2-fold: (a) identify the gaps in understanding and application of grading in RCC subtypes so that researchers in the field may perform additional studies on the basis of which the important pathologic function of assignment of grade may be recommended to be performed as a meaningful exercise across a wider spectrum of RCC; and (b) to provide guidance in the interim to surgical pathologists in terms of providing clinically useful grading information in RCC based on currently available clinicopathologic information.

Updated pathology reporting standards for bladder cancer: biopsies, transurethral resections and radical cystectomies.

AIM: Optimal management of bladder cancer requires an accurate, standardised and timely pathological diagnosis, and close communication between surgeons and pathologists. Here, we provide an update on pathology reporting standards of transurethral resections of the bladder and cystectomies. METHODS: We reviewed recent literature, focusing on developments between 2013 and 2021. RESULTS: Published reporting standards developed by pathology organizations have improved diagnosis and treatment. Tumor sub-staging and subtyping has gained increased attention. Lymph nodes continue to be an area of debate, and their staging has seen minor modifications. Several tasks, particularly regarding specimen preparation ("grossing"), are not yet standardized and offer opportunity for improvement. Molecular classification is rapidly evolving, but currently has only limited impact on management. CONCLUSION: Pathological reporting of bladder cancer is continuously evolving and remains challenging in some areas. This review provides an overview of recent major developments, with a particular focus on published reporting standards.

New developments in existing WHO entities and evolving molecular concepts: The Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) update on renal neoplasia.

The 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.

Novel, emerging and provisional renal entities: The Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) update on renal neoplasia.

The Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) undertook a critical review of the recent advances in renal neoplasia, particularly focusing on the newly accumulated evidence post-2016 World Health Organization (WHO) classification. In the era of evolving histo-molecular classification of renal neoplasia, morphology is still key. However, entities (or groups of entities) are increasingly characterized by specific molecular features, often associated either with recognizable, specific morphologies or constellations of morphologies and corresponding immunohistochemical profiles. The correct diagnosis has clinical implications leading to better prognosis, potential clinical management with targeted therapies, may identify hereditary or syndromic associations, which may necessitate appropriate genetic testing. We hope that this undertaking will further facilitate the identification of these entities in practice. We also hope that this update will bring more clarity regarding the evolving classification of renal neoplasia and will further reduce the category of "unclassifiable renal carcinomas/tumors". We propose three categories of novel entities: (1) "Novel entity", validated by multiple independent studies; (2) "Emerging entity", good compelling data available from at least two or more independent studies, but additional validation is needed; and (3) "Provisional entity", limited data available from one or two studies, with more work required to validate them. For some entities initially described using different names, we propose new terminologies, to facilitate their recognition and to avoid further diagnostic dilemmas. Following these criteria, we propose as novel entities: eosinophilic solid and cystic renal cell carcinoma (ESC RCC), renal cell carcinoma with fibromyomatous stroma (RCC FMS) (formerly RCC with leiomyomatous or smooth muscle stroma), and anaplastic lymphoma kinase rearrangement-associated renal cell carcinoma (ALK-RCC). Emerging entities include: eosinophilic vacuolated tumor (EVT) and thyroid-like follicular renal cell carcinoma (TLFRCC). Finally, as provisional entities, we propose low-grade oncocytic tumor (LOT), atrophic kidney-like lesion (AKLL), and biphasic hyalinizing psammomatous renal cell carcinoma (BHP RCC).

Low-grade Oncocytic Fumarate Hydratase-deficient Renal Cell Carcinoma: An Update on Biologic Potential, Morphologic Spectrum, and Differential Diagnosis With Other Low-grade Oncocytic Tumors.

Fumarate hydratase-deficient renal cell carcinoma (FH-deficient RCC) is typically considered a high-grade, aggressive subtype of RCC that frequently arises in the setting of hereditary leiomyomatosis-renal cell carcinoma (HLRCC) syndrome. Increasing experience with HLRCC-associated RCC and FH-deficient RCC has resulted in recognition of tumors with lower grade morphologic features, overlapping with those of succinate dehydrogenase-deficient RCC and other low-grade oncocytic tumors. In this review article, we report a previously unpublished case that was recently encountered in our practice and review cases in the current literature with an aim of getting a better understanding of these oncocytic tumors and their morphologic spectrum. The 13 cases reviewed were approximately equally distributed across males and females, occurred at a younger age, and were more frequently seen in the right kidney, with both unifocal and multifocal presentations. While most presented an exclusive, low-grade oncocytic morphology, in 4 cases they were associated with either separate high-grade tumors, or as a secondary pattern in an otherwise conventional high-grade FH-deficient RCC. Loss of FH and 2 succinyl cysteine (2SC) positivity by immunohistochemistry supported their diagnosis, and are recommended to be performed alongside CD117, CK7, and CK20 in to aid classification in challenging oncocytic tumors. When occurring in isolation, these tumors are distinctive from their high-grade counterparts, with no reported adverse outcomes in cases reported thus far. As such, accurate diagnosis of this low-grade pattern among FH-deficient RCCs is worthwhile not only due to its association with HLRCC and need of genetic counseling and surveillance, but also due to more favorable prognosis. Finally, increasing experience with the low-grade end of the morphologic spectrum of FH deficient RCC reiterates that not all tumors of this subtype of RCC have a uniformly aggressive outcome.

Similarities and Differences in the 2019 ISUP and GUPS Recommendations on Prostate Cancer Grading: A Guide for Practicing Pathologists.

Contemporary subspecialization of practice in prostate pathology has seen a transition to complex, nuanced reporting, where a growing number of histopathologic parameters may signal differences in patient management. In this context, the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) and the Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) both published proceedings papers on the grading of prostate cancer in 2019. Overall, the 2 prostate cancer grading manuscripts reached many of the same conclusions and recommendations. Yet, each consensus was conducted somewhat differently, and in a couple of key areas, each reached different conclusions and recommendations. Herein, sourced from the experience and viewpoints of members of both societies, we provide the practicing pathologist a summary of the shared recommendations, and of the discordances. It is anticipated that these 2 documents will inform future iterations of recommendations and guidelines for reporting prostate cancer by organizations such as the College of American Pathologists, the Royal College of Pathologists, and the European Society of Pathology, which will promote best practices for their respective constituents. Our goal is to provide the practicing pathologist a useful catalog of the main points of both, allowing each practitioner to make informed decisions and understand any divergent opinions as may arise between observers for individual cases.

The Genitourinary Pathology Society Update on Classification and Grading of Flat and Papillary Urothelial Neoplasia With New Reporting Recommendations and Approach to Lesions With Mixed and Early Patterns of Neoplasia.

The Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) undertook a critical review of the recent advances in bladder neoplasia with a focus on issues relevant to the practicing surgical pathologist for the understanding and effective reporting of bladder cancer, emphasizing particularly on the newly accumulated evidence post-2016 World Health Organization (WHO) classification. The work is presented in 2 manuscripts. Here, in the first, we revisit the nomenclature and classification system used for grading flat and papillary urothelial lesions centering on clinical relevance, and on dilemmas related to application in routine reporting. As patients of noninvasive bladder cancer frequently undergo cystoscopy and biopsy in their typically prolonged clinical course and for surveillance of disease, we discuss morphologies presented in these scenarios which may not have readily applicable diagnostic terms in the WHO classification. The topic of inverted patterns in urothelial neoplasia, particularly when prominent or exclusive, and beyond inverted papilloma has not been addressed formally in the WHO classification. Herein we provide a through review and suggest guidelines for when and how to report such lesions. In promulgating these GUPS recommendations, we aim to provide clarity on the clinical application of these not so uncommon diagnostically challenging situations encountered in routine practice, while also importantly advocating consistent terminology which would inform future work.

The Genitourinary Pathology Society Update on Classification of Variant Histologies, T1 Substaging, Molecular Taxonomy, and Immunotherapy and PD-L1 Testing Implications of Urothelial Cancers.

The Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) undertook a critical review of the recent advances in bladder cancer focusing on important topics of high interest for the practicing surgical pathologist and urologist. This review represents the second of 2 manuscripts ensuing from this effort. Herein, we address the effective reporting of bladder cancer, focusing particularly on newly published data since the last 2016 World Health Organization (WHO) classification. In addition, this review focuses on the importance of reporting bladder cancer with divergent differentiation and variant (subtypes of urothelial carcinoma) histologies and the potential impact on patient care. We provide new recommendations for reporting pT1 staging in diagnostic pathology. Furthermore, we explore molecular evolution and classification, emphasizing aspects that impact the understanding of important concepts relevant to reporting and management of patients.