Sebaceous Neoplasms With Rippled, Labyrinthine/Sinusoidal, Petaloid, and Carcinoid-Like Patterns: A Study of 57 Cases Validating Their Occurrence as a Morphological Spectrum and Showing No Significant Association With Muir-Torre Syndrome or DNA Mismatch Repair Protein Deficiency.

Sebaceous neoplasms with an organoid pattern (rippled, labyrinthine/sinusoidal, carcinoid-like, and petaloid) are rare. Previous studies suggested that the above patterns likely represent variations along a morphological continuum. The objectives of this study were to (1) validate this proposition by studying a large number of cases, (2) determine whether there are specific associations with clinical features, (3) establish their frequency, and (4) determine whether they have any association with Muir-Torre syndrome. Fifty-seven sebaceous neoplasms (54 sebaceomas and 3 sebaceous carcinomas) with organoid growth patterns were studied. These occurred in 36 men and 18 women (sex unknown in 3), with ages at diagnosis ranging from 22 to 89 years (mean, 63 years). All patients presented with a solitary nodule (mean size, 11 mm) on the head and neck area. Of the 57 tumors, 24 manifested a single growth pattern, 23 had a combination of 2 patterns, and 10 a combination of 3 patterns, indicating that these patterns are part of a morphological continuum of changes. The carcinoid-like pattern was the most frequent in the "monopatterned" neoplasms (13 cases), whereas the labyrinthine/sinusoidal pattern comprised most of the "polypatterned" lesions, in which various combinations occurred. Immunohistochemically, mismatch repair protein deficiency was detected in 3 of the 22 cases studied, whereas 5 of the 33 patients with available follow-up had an internal malignancy/premalignancy. In conclusion, sebaceous neoplasms with organoid growth patterns are predominantly sebaceomas having a predilection for the scalp, occurring as solitary lesions in elderly patients (male to female ratio of 2:1). Such patterns are expected to be found in a quarter of sebaceomas. In most cases, more than one of the organoid patterns is present. These lesions do not appear to be associated with internal malignancy or mismatch repair deficiency in most cases. However, confirmation of the absence of any significant association with Muir-Torre syndrome syndrome will require genetic studies.

Tumour Budding Is a Useful Predictor to Identify High-Risk Stage II Colon Cancer Patients After Curative Surgery.

Aim. Although it is now accepted in the literature that tumour budding (TB) is a useful survival indicator in colon cancer (CC), there are still uncertainties about daily use. Here we methodologically examined the role of TB on survival in CC. Methods. In our study, we examined colon cancer patients who had surgery up to 15 years before presentation. TB was calculated separately using different comprehensive methodological methods. Results. We first investigated an optimal evaluation method. Relationship with prognostic factors was better (Venous invasion [p = .001], advanced pT [p = .003], perineural invasion [p = .040], MSS [p = .016], advanced size [p = .001], tumour obstruction [p = .005], margin involvement [p = .043], and nodal involvement [p = .028]) in Method-1. Similarly, with the same method, the success of the cut-off value, the correlation of TB data (r = .724), and the repeatability of the method (Κappa = .53-.75) were quite good (ROC = .816 [.707-.925]). Then, survival analysis was performed using the best three methods, including this method. In univariate analysis using Method-1, survival analyses were worse in high TB patients (RFS: 81%, p < .001; OS: 84%, p < .001). Multivariate analyses using the same method confirmed that high TB for RFS and OS was an independent poor prognostic parameter for survival (p = .002, Hazard ratio [HR]: 1.42 [1.13-1.80]) and OS (p = .014, HR: 1.38 [1.07-1.79]). Conclusions. With our study, we showed that tumour budding calculated by the standard method is a very valuable prognostic parameter in stage II CC and can contribute to the detection of patients with poor prognosis in stage II CC.

"High-grade oncocytic renal tumor": morphologic, immunohistochemical, and molecular genetic study of 14 cases.

The spectrum of the renal oncocytic tumors has been expanded in recent years to include several novel and emerging entities. We describe a cohort of novel, hitherto unrecognized and morphologically distinct high-grade oncocytic tumors (HOT), currently diagnosed as "unclassified" in the WHO classification. We identified 14 HOT by searching multiple institutional archives. Morphologic, immunohistochemical (IHC), molecular genetic, and molecular karyotyping studies were performed to investigate these tumors. The patients included 3 men and 11 women, with age range from 25 to 73 years (median 50, mean 49 years). Tumor size ranged from 1.5 to 7.0 cm in the greatest dimension (median 3, mean 3.4 cm). The tumors were all pT1 stage. Microscopically, they showed nested to solid growth, and focal tubulocystic architecture. The neoplastic cells were uniform with voluminous oncocytic cytoplasm. Prominent intracytoplasmic vacuoles were frequently seen, but no irregular (raisinoid) nuclei or perinuclear halos were present. All tumors demonstrated prominent nucleoli (WHO/ISUP grade 3 equivalent). Nine of 14 cases were positive for CD117 and cytokeratin (CK) 7 was either negative or only focally positive in of 6/14 cases. All tumors were positive for AE1-AE3, CK18, PAX 8, antimitochondrial antigen, and SDHB. Cathepsin K was positive in 13/14 cases and CD10 was positive in 12/13 cases. All cases were negative for TFE3, HMB45, Melan-A. No TFEB and TFE3 genes rearrangement was found in analyzable cases. By array CGH, complete chromosomal losses or gains were not found in any of the cases, and 3/9 cases showed absence of any abnormalities. Chromosomal losses were detected on chromosome 19 (4/9), 3 with losses of the short arm (p) and 1 with losses of both arms (p and q). Loss of chromosome 1 was found in 3/9 cases; gain of 5q was found in 1/9 cases. On molecular karyotyping, 3/3 evaluated cases showed loss of heterozygosity (LOH) on 16p11.2-11.1 and 2/3 cases showed LOH at 7q31.31. Copy number (CN) losses were found at 7q11.21 (3/3), Xp11.21 (3/3), Xp11.22-11.21 (3/3), and Xq24-25 (2/3). CN gains were found at 13q34 (2/3). Ten patients with available follow up information were alive and without disease progression, after a mean follow-up of 28 months (1 to 112 months). HOT is a tumor with unique morphology and its IHC profile appears mostly consistent. HOT should be considered as an emerging renal entity because it does not meet the diagnostic criteria for other recognized eosinophilic renal tumors, such as oncocytoma, chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (RCC), TFE3 and TFEB RCC, SDH-deficient RCC, and eosinophilic solid and cystic RCC.