Progression of duodenal neoplasia to advanced adenoma in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) have a lifetime risk of developing duodenal adenomas approaching 100%, and the relative risk for duodenal cancer compared with the general population is high. We conducted a retrospective study to investigate the progression of non-ampullary duodenal adenomas (NADAs) and risk factors for advanced lesions in patients with FAP. METHODS: Of 248 patients with 139 pedigrees at 2 institutes, we assessed 151 patients with 100 pedigrees with a pathogenic germline variant in the adenomatous polyposis coli gene, excluding mosaic variants. We evaluated the prevalence of NADAs in patients with FAP, the progression of these adenomas to advanced adenoma during the observation period, and the risk factors for the lifetime development of high-grade dysplasia (HGD), large (≥ 10 mm) duodenal adenomas, and Spiegelman stage IV. RESULTS: During the median observation period of 7 years, the incidences of patients with NADAs, with more than 20 polyps, with polyps ≥ 10 mm, with HGD, and with stage IV at the last esophagogastroduodenoscopy were increased 1.6-fold, 1.7-fold, 5-fold, 22-fold, and 9-fold, respectively. Intramucosal cancer occurred in three patients (2%), but no patients developed invasive cancer during the observation period because we performed endoscopic intervention for advanced adenomas. Stage progression was observed in 71% of 113 patients. Stage IV was more common in women, patients with a history of colectomy, and those with a 3' side mutation in their adenomatous polyposis coli gene. CONCLUSIONS: NADAs in patients with FAP frequently become exacerbated. Our findings suggest that patients with FAP who develop duodenal adenomas should be surveyed to prevent the development of duodenal cancer.

Genotype-phenotype correlation for extracolonic aggressive phenotypes in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis.

Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) patients develop various life-threatening extracolonic comorbidities that appear individually or within a family. This diversity can be explained by the localization of the adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) variant, but few reports provide definitive findings about genotype-phenotype correlations. Therefore, we investigated FAP patients and the association between the severe phenotypes and APC variants. Of 247 FAP patients, 126 patients from 85 families identified to have APC germline variant sites were extracted. These sites were divided into six groups (Regions A to F), and the frequency of severe comorbidities was compared among the patient phenotypes. Of the 126 patients, the proportions of patients with desmoid tumor stage ≥III, number of FGPs ≥1000, multiple gastric neoplasms, gastric neoplasm with high-grade dysplasia, and Spigelman stage ≥III were 3%, 16%, 21%, 12%, and 41%, respectively, while the corresponding rates were 30%, 50%, 70%, 50%, and 80% in patients with Region E (codons 1398-1580) variants. These latter rates were significantly higher than those for patients with variants in other regions. Moreover, the proportion of patients with all three indicators (desmoid tumor stage ≥III, number of FGPs ≥1000, and Spigelman stage ≥III) was 20% for those with variants in Region E and 0% for those with variants in other regions. Variants in Region E indicate aggressive phenotypes, and more intensive management is required.

Feasibility of underwater endoscopic mucosal resection for endoscopic management of gastric neoplasms in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis.

BACKGROUND: Underwater endoscopic mucosal resection (UEMR) has been developed as an effective endoscopic intervention for colon, rectum, and duodenum neoplasms. However, there are no comprehensive reports regarding the stomach, and its safety and efficacy are unknown. We aimed to examine the feasibility of UEMR for gastric neoplasms in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP). METHODS: We retrospectively extracted data of patients with FAP who underwent endoscopic resection (ER) for gastric neoplasms at Osaka International Cancer Institute from February 2009 to December 2018. Elevated gastric neoplasms of ≤ 20 mm in diameter were extracted, and conventional endoscopic mucosal resection (CEMR) and UEMR were compared. Furthermore, outcomes after ER until March 2020 were examined. RESULTS: 91 endoscopically resected gastric neoplasms were extracted from 31 patients with 26 pedigrees, and 12 neoplasms underwent CEMR and 25 neoplasms underwent UEMR was compared. The procedure time was shorter for UEMR than for CEMR. There was no significant difference between en bloc resection and R0 resection rates by EMR methods. CEMR and UEMR showed postoperative hemorrhage rates of 8% and 0%, respectively. Residual/local recurrent neoplasms were identified in four lesions (4%), but additional endoscopic intervention (three UEMR and one cauterization) resulted in a local cure. CONCLUSION: UEMR was feasible in gastric neoplasms of FAP patients, especially in elevated lesions and those of ≤ 20 mm in diameter.

Gastric neoplasms in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis: endoscopic and clinicopathologic features.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Gastric neoplasms in patients with familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) occur at a high rate and can cause death. The endoscopic findings of gastric neoplasms in these patients are characteristic but not well recognized. To identify the relevant characteristics to enable early detection, we retrospectively investigated endoscopic findings of gastric neoplasms in patients with FAP and then compared the clinical, histopathologic, and genetic features among subgroups. METHODS: Of 234 patients with 171 pedigrees at 2 institutes, 56 cases (24%, 133 gastric neoplasms) with 44 pedigrees were examined. Immunostaining was performed for histopathologic evaluation by 1 blinded pathologist. According to the endoscopic findings, gastric neoplasms were divided into 4 types based on location (L: antrum and pylorus, UM: the rest of the stomach) and color (W: white, T: translucent, R: reddish) and their clinicopathologic features examined. RESULTS: Of the cases, 93% could be classified into a single type. Among histologic phenotypes, high-grade dysplasia was present in 26% (type L), 41% (type UM-W), 0% (type UM-T), and 22% (type UM-R). The immunologic phenotype comprised the gastric type in 69% (93% in Type UM) and the intestinal phenotype, including the mixed type, in 31% (61% in type L). Moreover, 96% of patients had concurrent duodenal neoplasms. Adenomatous polyposis coli gene status was identified in 93% of patients; the pathogenic variant was detected in 98% but did not influence any endoscopic features. CONCLUSIONS: Gastric neoplasms in patients with FAP were stratified into 4 types according to their endoscopic findings. The endoscopic phenotype was related to the histopathologic phenotype but not to germline variants.

A case of immunohistochemical false positive staining caused by incompatibility between a CD4 antibody and an autostainer.

Precise immunophenotyping of tumor cells by immunohistochemistry is complementary to morphological examination. It is critical for the correct histopathological diagnosis of lymphomas. In this paper, we report a case of T-cell lymphoma whose histopathological diagnosis was confounded by an immunohistochemical pitfall: a false positive caused by incompatibility between an antibody and an autostainer. In this case, based on CD4 immunohistochemistry of the affected lymph nodes, the T-cell lymphoma was diagnosed as CD4-positive at the onset, while it appeared discordantly to be CD4-negative at the second relapse. We noticed that CD4 antibodies and autostainers of different suppliers (designated as suppliers X and Y) were used in an unqualified combination in immunohistochemistry at the onset: that is, the combination of an antibody supplied by X and an autostainer supplied by Y (designated as X-Y combination) was used at the onset. On the other hand, the Y-Y combination was at the second relapse. At the second relapse, flow cytometry of the affected lymph node showed infiltration of CD4-negative T-cell lymphoma. We reasoned that CD4 immunonegativity obtained by the Y-Y combination at the second relapse was specific, while CD4 immunopositivity by the X-Y combination at the onset was false positive. Immunohistochemical reexamination of the lymph node at the onset proved to be CD4-negative by not only the Y-Y but also X-X combinations, confirming our final diagnosis of nodal relapse of CD4-negative T-cell lymphoma. This case illustrates the importance of using compatible combinations of antibodies and autostainers in diagnostic immunohistochemistry.