Research autopsy programmes in oncology: shared experience from 14 centres across the world.

While there is a great clinical need to understand the biology of metastatic cancer in order to treat it more effectively, research is hampered by limited sample availability. Research autopsy programmes can crucially advance the field through synchronous, extensive, and high-volume sample collection. However, it remains an underused strategy in translational research. Via an extensive questionnaire, we collected information on the study design, enrolment strategy, study conduct, sample and data management, and challenges and opportunities of research autopsy programmes in oncology worldwide. Fourteen programmes participated in this study. Eight programmes operated 24 h/7 days, resulting in a lower median postmortem interval (time between death and start of the autopsy, 4 h) compared with those operating during working hours (9 h). Most programmes (n = 10) succeeded in collecting all samples within a median of 12 h after death. A large number of tumour sites were sampled during each autopsy (median 15.5 per patient). The median number of samples collected per patient was 58, including different processing methods for tumour samples but also non-tumour tissues and liquid biopsies. Unique biological insights derived from these samples included metastatic progression, treatment resistance, disease heterogeneity, tumour dormancy, interactions with the tumour micro-environment, and tumour representation in liquid biopsies. Tumour patient-derived xenograft (PDX) or organoid (PDO) models were additionally established, allowing for drug discovery and treatment sensitivity assays. Apart from the opportunities and achievements, we also present the challenges related with postmortem sample collections and strategies to overcome them, based on the shared experience of these 14 programmes. Through this work, we hope to increase the transparency of postmortem tissue donation, to encourage and aid the creation of new programmes, and to foster collaborations on these unique sample collections. © 2024 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

Comparison of standard mismatch repair deficiency and microsatellite instability tests in a large cancer series.

BACKGROUND: The tumor-agnostic indication of immune checkpoint inhibitors to treat cancers with mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR)/microsatellite instability (MSI) increased the demand for such tests beyond Lynch syndrome. International guideline recommendations accept immunohistochemistry (IHC) for dMMR or molecular techniques (PCR or NGS) for MSI status determinations considering the two tests are equal, although there are scattered reports contradicting to this presumption. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Here we have directly compared four protein MMR immunohistochemistry (IHC) to MSI Pentaplex PCR test in a large cancer patient cohort (n = 1306) of our diagnostic center where the two tests have been run parallel in 703 cases. RESULTS: In this study we have found a high discrepancy rate (19.3%) of the two tests which was independent of the tumor types. The MSI PCR sensitivity for MMR IHC status was found to be very low resulting in a relatively low positive and negative predicting values. As a consequence, the correlation of the two tests was low (kappa < 0.7). During analysis of the possible contributing factors of this poor performance, we have excluded low tumor percentage of the samples, but identified dMMR phenotypes (classic versus non-classic or unusual) as possible contributors. CONCLUSION: Although our cohort did not include samples with identified technical errors, our data strongly support previous reports that unidentified preanalytical factors might have the major influence on the poor performance of the MSI PCR and MMR IHC. Furthermore, the case is open whether the two test types are equally powerful predictive markers of immunotherapies.

Dataset for reporting of the invasive carcinoma of the breast: recommendations from the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Current national or regional guidelines for the pathology reporting on invasive breast cancer differ in certain aspects, resulting in divergent reporting practice and a lack of comparability of data. Here we report on a new international dataset for the pathology reporting of resection specimens with invasive cancer of the breast. The dataset was produced under the auspices of the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR), a global alliance of major (inter-)national pathology and cancer organizations. METHODS AND RESULTS: The established ICCR process for dataset development was followed. An international expert panel consisting of breast pathologists, a surgeon, and an oncologist prepared a draft set of core and noncore data items based on a critical review and discussion of current evidence. Commentary was provided for each data item to explain the rationale for selecting it as a core or noncore element, its clinical relevance, and to highlight potential areas of disagreement or lack of evidence, in which case a consensus position was formulated. Following international public consultation, the document was finalized and ratified, and the dataset, which includes a synoptic reporting guide, was published on the ICCR website. CONCLUSIONS: This first international dataset for invasive cancer of the breast is intended to promote high-quality, standardized pathology reporting. Its widespread adoption will improve consistency of reporting, facilitate multidisciplinary communication, and enhance comparability of data, all of which will help to improve the management of invasive breast cancer patients.

A dedicated structured data set for reporting of invasive carcinoma of the breast in the setting of neoadjuvant therapy: recommendations from the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR).

AIMS: The International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR), a global alliance of major (inter-)national pathology and cancer organisations, is an initiative aimed at providing a unified international approach to reporting cancer. ICCR recently published new data sets for the reporting of invasive breast carcinoma, surgically removed lymph nodes for breast tumours and ductal carcinoma in situ, variants of lobular carcinoma in situ and low-grade lesions. The data set in this paper addresses the neoadjuvant setting. The aim is to promote high-quality, standardised reporting of tumour response and residual disease after neoadjuvant treatment that can be used for subsequent management decisions for each patient. METHODS: The ICCR convened expert panels of breast pathologists with a representative surgeon and oncologist to critically review and discuss current evidence. Feedback from the international public consultation was critical in the development of this data set. RESULTS: The expert panel concluded that a dedicated data set was required for reporting of breast specimens post-neoadjuvant therapy with inclusion of data elements specific to the neoadjuvant setting as core or non-core elements. This data set proposes a practical approach for handling and reporting breast resection specimens following neoadjuvant therapy. The comments for each data element clarify terminology, discuss available evidence and highlight areas with limited evidence that need further study. This data set overlaps with, and should be used in conjunction with, the data sets for the reporting of invasive breast carcinoma and surgically removed lymph nodes from patients with breast tumours, as appropriate. Key issues specific to the neoadjuvant setting are included in this paper. The entire data set is freely available on the ICCR website. CONCLUSIONS: High-quality, standardised reporting of tumour response and residual disease after neoadjuvant treatment are critical for subsequent management decisions for each patient.

Microsatellite instability and mismatch repair protein deficiency: equal predictive markers?

Current clinical guidelines recommend mismatch repair (MMR) protein immunohistochemistry (IHC) or molecular microsatellite instability (MSI) tests as predictive markers of immunotherapies. Most of the pathological guidelines consider MMR protein IHC as the gold standard test to identify cancers with MMR deficiency and recommend molecular MSI tests only in special circumstances or to screen for Lynch syndrome. However, there are data in the literature which suggest that the two test types may not be equal. For example, molecular epidemiology studies reported different rates of deficient MMR (dMMR) and MSI in various cancer types. Additionally, direct comparisons of the two tests revealed relatively frequent discrepancies between MMR IHC and MSI tests, especially in non-colorectal and non-endometrial cancers and in cases with unusual dMMR phenotypes. There are also scattered clinical data showing that the efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors is different if the patient selection was based on dMMR versus MSI status of the cancers. All these observations question the current dogma that dMMR phenotype and genetic MSI status are equal predictive markers of the immunotherapies.

TRPS1 expression in breast angiosarcoma.

Angiosarcoma (AS) of the breast, a rare mesenchymal neoplasm, exhibits distinct forms based on etiological and genetic features. While cases with typical clinical presentation and morphology allow for a straightforward diagnosis, challenges arise when clinical data are scarce, diagnostic material is limited, or morphological characteristics overlap with other tumors, including undifferentiated carcinomas. The trichorhinophalangeal syndrome protein 1 (TRPS1), once regarded as highly specific for breast carcinomas, now faces doubts regarding its reliability. This study explores TRPS1 expression in breast AS. Our investigation revealed that 60% of AS cases displayed TRPS1 labeling, contrasting with the 40% lacking expression. Scoring by four independent readers established a consensus, designating 12/35 ASs as unequivocally TRPS1-positive. However, uncertainty surrounded nine further cases due to a lack of reader agreement (being substantial as reflected by a kappa value of 0.76). These findings challenge the perceived specificity of TRPS1, shedding light on its presence in a noteworthy proportion of breast ASs. Consequently, the study underscores the importance of a comprehensive approach in evaluating breast ASs and expands the range of entities within the differential diagnosis associated with TRPS1 labeling.

Histopathological growth patterns and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in breast cancer liver metastases.

Liver is the third most common organ for breast cancer (BC) metastasis. Two main histopathological growth patterns (HGP) exist in liver metastases (LM): desmoplastic and replacement. Although a reduced immunotherapy efficacy is reported in patients with LM, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) have not yet been investigated in BCLM. Here, we evaluate the distribution of the HGP and TIL in BCLM, and their association with clinicopathological variables and survival. We collect samples from surgically resected BCLM (n = 133 patients, 568 H&E sections) and post-mortem derived BCLM (n = 23 patients, 97 H&E sections). HGP is assessed as the proportion of tumor liver interface and categorized as pure-replacement ('pure r-HGP') or any-desmoplastic ('any d-HGP'). We score the TIL according to LM-specific guidelines. Associations with progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) are assessed using Cox regressions. We observe a higher prevalence of 'any d-HGP' (56%) in the surgical samples and a higher prevalence of 'pure r-HGP' (83%) in the post-mortem samples. In the surgical cohort, no evidence of the association between HGP and clinicopathological characteristics is observed except with the laterality of the primary tumor (p value = 0.049) and the systemic preoperative treatment before liver surgery (p value = .039). TIL is less prevalent in 'pure r-HGP' as compared to 'any d-HGP' (p value = 0.001). 'Pure r-HGP' predicts worse PFS (HR: 2.65; CI: (1.45-4.82); p value = 0.001) and OS (HR: 3.10; CI: (1.29-7.46); p value = 0.011) in the multivariable analyses. To conclude, we demonstrate that BCLM with a 'pure r-HGP' is associated with less TIL and with the worse outcome when compared with BCLM with 'any d-HGP'. These findings suggest that HGP could be considered to refine treatment approaches.