Acceptance of emerging renal oncocytic neoplasms: a survey of urologic pathologists.

Oncocytic renal neoplasms are a major source of diagnostic challenge in genitourinary pathology; however, they are typically nonaggressive in general, raising the question of whether distinguishing different subtypes, including emerging entities, is necessary. Emerging entities recently described include eosinophilic solid and cystic renal cell carcinoma (ESC RCC), low-grade oncocytic tumor (LOT), eosinophilic vacuolated tumor (EVT), and papillary renal neoplasm with reverse polarity (PRNRP). A survey was shared among 65 urologic pathologists using SurveyMonkey.com (Survey Monkey, Santa Clara, CA, USA). De-identified and anonymized respondent data were analyzed. Sixty-three participants completed the survey and contributed to the study. Participants were from Asia (n = 21; 35%), North America (n = 31; 52%), Europe (n = 6; 10%), and Australia (n = 2; 3%). Half encounter oncocytic renal neoplasms that are difficult to classify monthly or more frequently. Most (70%) indicated that there is enough evidence to consider ESC RCC as a distinct entity now, whereas there was less certainty for LOT (27%), EVT (29%), and PRNRP (37%). However, when combining the responses for sufficient evidence currently and likely in the future, LOT and EVT yielded > 70% and > 60% for PRNRP. Most (60%) would not render an outright diagnosis of oncocytoma on needle core biopsy. There was a dichotomy in the routine use of immunohistochemistry (IHC) in the evaluation of oncocytoma (yes = 52%; no = 48%). The most utilized IHC markers included keratin 7 and 20, KIT, AMACR, PAX8, CA9, melan A, succinate dehydrogenase (SDH)B, and fumarate hydratase (FH). Genetic techniques used included TSC1/TSC2/MTOR (67%) or TFE3 (74%) genes and pathways; however, the majority reported using these very rarely. Only 40% have encountered low-grade oncocytic renal neoplasms that are deficient for FH. Increasing experience with the spectrum of oncocytic renal neoplasms will likely yield further insights into the most appropriate work-up, classification, and clinical management for these entities.

Development, multi-institutional external validation, and algorithmic audit of an artificial intelligence-based Side-specific Extra-Prostatic Extension Risk Assessment tool (SEPERA) for patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Accurate prediction of side-specific extraprostatic extension (ssEPE) is essential for performing nerve-sparing surgery to mitigate treatment-related side-effects such as impotence and incontinence in patients with localised prostate cancer. Artificial intelligence (AI) might provide robust and personalised ssEPE predictions to better inform nerve-sparing strategy during radical prostatectomy. We aimed to develop, externally validate, and perform an algorithmic audit of an AI-based Side-specific Extra-Prostatic Extension Risk Assessment tool (SEPERA). METHODS: Each prostatic lobe was treated as an individual case such that each patient contributed two cases to the overall cohort. SEPERA was trained on 1022 cases from a community hospital network (Trillium Health Partners; Mississauga, ON, Canada) between 2010 and 2020. Subsequently, SEPERA was externally validated on 3914 cases across three academic centres: Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (Toronto, ON, Canada) from 2008 to 2020; L'Institut Mutualiste Montsouris (Paris, France) from 2010 to 2020; and Jules Bordet Institute (Brussels, Belgium) from 2015 to 2020. Model performance was characterised by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), area under the precision recall curve (AUPRC), calibration, and net benefit. SEPERA was compared against contemporary nomograms (ie, Sayyid nomogram, Soeterik nomogram [non-MRI and MRI]), as well as a separate logistic regression model using the same variables included in SEPERA. An algorithmic audit was performed to assess model bias and identify common patient characteristics among predictive errors. FINDINGS: Overall, 2468 patients comprising 4936 cases (ie, prostatic lobes) were included in this study. SEPERA was well calibrated and had the best performance across all validation cohorts (pooled AUROC of 0·77 [95% CI 0·75-0·78] and pooled AUPRC of 0·61 [0·58-0·63]). In patients with pathological ssEPE despite benign ipsilateral biopsies, SEPERA correctly predicted ssEPE in 72 (68%) of 106 cases compared with the other models (47 [44%] in the logistic regression model, none in the Sayyid model, 13 [12%] in the Soeterik non-MRI model, and five [5%] in the Soeterik MRI model). SEPERA had higher net benefit than the other models to predict ssEPE, enabling more patients to safely undergo nerve-sparing. In the algorithmic audit, no evidence of model bias was observed, with no significant difference in AUROC when stratified by race, biopsy year, age, biopsy type (systematic only vs systematic and MRI-targeted biopsy), biopsy location (academic vs community), and D'Amico risk group. According to the audit, the most common errors were false positives, particularly for older patients with high-risk disease. No aggressive tumours (ie, grade >2 or high-risk disease) were found among false negatives. INTERPRETATION: We demonstrated the accuracy, safety, and generalisability of using SEPERA to personalise nerve-sparing approaches during radical prostatectomy. FUNDING: None.

Prostate Adenocarcinoma Grade Group 1: Rationale for Retaining a Cancer Label in the 2022 World Health Organization Classification.

We present the rationale for keeping the "cancer" label for grade group 1 (GG1) prostate cancer. Maintaining GG1 as the lowest grade outweighs the potential benefits that a benign designation may bring. Patient and surgeon education on the vital role of active surveillance for GG1 cancers and avoidance of overtreatment should be the focus rather than such a drastic change in nomenclature.

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.

The 2022 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Urinary System and Male Genital Organs-Part B: Prostate and Urinary Tract Tumors.

The 2022 World Health Organization (WHO) classification of the urinary and male genital tumors was recently published by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. This fifth edition of the WHO "Blue Book" offers a comprehensive update on the terminology, epidemiology, pathogenesis, histopathology, diagnostic molecular pathology, and prognostic and predictive progress in genitourinary tumors. In this review, the editors of the fifth series volume on urologic and male genital neoplasms present a summary of the salient changes introduced to the classification of tumors of the prostate and the urinary tract.

The 2022 World Health Organization Classification of Tumours of the Urinary System and Male Genital Organs-Part A: Renal, Penile, and Testicular Tumours.

The fifth edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of urogenital tumours (WHO "Blue Book"), published in 2022, contains significant revisions. This review summarises the most relevant changes for renal, penile, and testicular tumours. In keeping with other volumes in the fifth edition series, the WHO classification of urogenital tumours follows a hierarchical classification and lists tumours by site, category, family, and type. The section "essential and desirable diagnostic criteria" included in the WHO fifth edition represents morphologic diagnostic criteria, combined with immunohistochemistry and relevant molecular tests. The global introduction of massive parallel sequencing will result in a diagnostic shift from morphology to molecular analyses. Therefore, a molecular-driven renal tumour classification has been introduced, taking recent discoveries in renal tumour genomics into account. Such novel molecularly defined epithelial renal tumours include SMARCB1-deficient medullary renal cell carcinoma (RCC), TFEB-altered RCC, Alk-rearranged RCC, and ELOC-mutated RCC. Eosinophilic solid and cystic RCC is a novel morphologically defined RCC entity. The diverse morphologic patterns of penile squamous cell carcinomas are grouped as human papillomavirus (HPV) associated and HPV independent, and there is an attempt to simplify the morphologic classification. A new chapter with tumours of the scrotum has been introduced. The main nomenclature of testicular tumours is retained, including the use of the term "germ cell neoplasia in situ" (GCNIS) for the preneoplastic lesion of most germ cell tumours and division from those not derived from GCNIS. Nomenclature changes include replacement of the term "primitive neuroectodermal tumour" by "embryonic neuroectodermal tumour" to separate these tumours clearly from Ewing sarcoma. The term "carcinoid" has been changed to "neuroendocrine tumour", with most examples in the testis now classified as "prepubertal type testicular neuroendocrine tumour".

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.

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.

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.

Explainable artificial intelligence to predict the risk of side-specific extraprostatic extension in pre-prostatectomy patients.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to develop an explainable machine learning (ML) model to predict side-specific extraprostatic extension (ssEPE) to identify patients who can safely undergo nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy using preoperative clinicopathological variables. METHODS: A retrospective sample of clinicopathological data from 900 prostatic lobes at our institution was used as the training cohort. Primary outcome was the presence of ssEPE. The baseline model for comparison had the highest performance out of current biopsy-derived predictive models for ssEPE. A separate logistic regression (LR) model was built using the same variables as the ML model. All models were externally validated using a testing cohort of 122 lobes from another institution. Models were assessed by area under receiver-operating-characteristic curve (AUROC), precision-recall curve (AUPRC), calibration, and decision curve analysis. Model predictions were explained using SHapley Additive exPlanations. This tool was deployed as a publicly available web application. RESULTS: Incidence of ssEPE in the training and testing cohorts were 30.7 and 41.8%, respectively. The ML model achieved AUROC 0.81 (LR 0.78, baseline 0.74) and AUPRC 0.69 (LR 0.64, baseline 0.59) on the training cohort. On the testing cohort, the ML model achieved AUROC 0.81 (LR 0.76, baseline 0.75) and AUPRC 0.78 (LR 0.75, baseline 0.70). The ML model was explainable, well-calibrated, and achieved the highest net benefit for clinically relevant cutoffs of 10-30%. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a user-friendly application that enables physicians without prior ML experience to assess ssEPE risk and understand factors driving these predictions to aid surgical planning and patient counselling (https://share.streamlit.io/jcckwong/ssepe/main/ssEPE_V2.py).

ISUP Consensus Definition of Cribriform Pattern Prostate Cancer.

The presence of a cribriform pattern is now recognized as a clinically important, independent adverse prognostic indicator for prostate cancer. For this reason the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) recently recommended its inclusion in standard reporting. In order to improve interobserver agreement as to the diagnosis of cribriform patterns, the ISUP assembled an international panel of 12 expert urogenital pathologists for the purpose of drafting a consensus definition of cribriform pattern in prostate cancer, and provide their opinions on a set of 32 images and on potential diagnostic criteria. These images were selected by the 2 nonvoting convenors of the study and included the main categories where disagreement was anticipated. The Delphi method was applied to promote consensus among the 12 panelists in their review of the images during 2 initial rounds of the study. Following a virtual meeting, convened to discuss selected images and diagnostic criteria, the following definition for cribriform pattern in prostate cancer was approved: "A confluent sheet of contiguous malignant epithelial cells with multiple glandular lumina that are easily visible at low power (objective magnification ×10). There should be no intervening stroma or mucin separating individual or fused glandular structures" together with a set of explanatory notes. We believe this consensus definition to be practical and that it will facilitate reproducible recognition and reporting of this clinically important pattern commonly seen in prostate cancer. The images and the results of the final Delphi round are available at the ISUP website as an educational slide set (https://isupweb.org/isup/blog/slideshow/cribriform-slide-deck/).

Cribriform prostate cancer: Morphologic criteria enabling a diagnosis, based on survey of experts.

Among four sub-patterns of Gleason grade 4 prostate cancer, voluminous evidence supports that the cribriform pattern holds an unfavorable prognostic impact, as compared with poorly-formed, fused, or glomeruloid. The International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) recommends specifying whether invasive grade 4 cancer is cribriform. Recently, ISUP experts published a consensus definition of cribriform pattern highlighting criteria that distinguish it from mimickers. The current study aimed to analyze morphologic features separately to identify those that define the essence of the cribriform pattern. Thirty-two selected photomicrographs were classified by 12 urologic pathologists as: definitely cribriform cancer, probably cribriform, unsure, probably not cribriform, or definitely not cribriform. Consensus was defined as 9/12 agree or disagree, with ≤1 strongly supporting the opposite choice. Final consensus was achieved in 21 of 32 cases. Generalized estimating equation (GEE) model with logit link was fitted to estimate effect of multiple morphologic predictors. Fisher exact test was used for categorical findings. Presence of intervening stroma precluded calling cribriform cancer (p = 0.006). Mucin presence detracted (p = 0.003) from willingness to call cribriform cancer (only 3 cases had mucin). Lumen number was associated with cribriform consensus (p = 0.0006), and all consensus cases had ≥9 lumens. Predominant papillary pattern or an irregular outer boundary detracted (p = NS). Invasive cribriform carcinoma should have absence of intervening stroma, and usually neither papillary pattern, irregular outer boundary, nor very few lumens. Setting the criteria for cribriform will help prevent over- or undercalling this important finding.

College of American Pathologists Cancer Protocols: From Optimizing Cancer Patient Care to Facilitating Interoperable Reporting and Downstream Data Use.

The College of American Pathologists Cancer Protocols have offered guidance to pathologists for standard cancer pathology reporting for more than 35 years. The adoption of computer readable versions of these protocols by electronic health record and laboratory information system (LIS) vendors has provided a mechanism for pathologists to report within their LIS workflow, in addition to enabling standardized structured data capture and reporting to downstream consumers of these data such as the cancer surveillance community. This paper reviews the history of the Cancer Protocols and electronic Cancer Checklists, outlines the current use of these critically important cancer case reporting tools, and examines future directions, including plans to help improve the integration of the Cancer Protocols into clinical, public health, research, and other workflows.