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.

• Keywords
• Emerging, Eosinophilic, Oncocytic, Renal neoplasms, Uropathologists,
• MeSH
• Carcinoma, Renal Cell * pathology   diagnosis   MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Biomarkers, Tumor analysis   MeSH
• Kidney Neoplasms * pathology   diagnosis   MeSH
• Adenoma, Oxyphilic * pathology   diagnosis   MeSH
• Pathologists * MeSH
• Surveys and Questionnaires MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Names of Substances
• Biomarkers, Tumor MeSH

Most succinate dehydrogenase (SDH)-deficient renal cell carcinomas (RCCs) demonstrate stereotypical morphology characterized by bland eosinophilic cells with frequent intracytoplasmic inclusions. However, variant morphologic features have been increasingly recognized. We therefore sought to investigate the incidence and characteristics of SDH-deficient RCC with variant morphologies. We studied a multi-institutional cohort of 62 new SDH-deficient RCCs from 59 patients. The median age at presentation was 39 years (range 19-80), with a slight male predominance (M:F = 1.6:1). A relevant family history was reported in 9 patients (15%). Multifocal or bilateral tumors were identified radiologically in 5 patients (8%). Typical morphology was present at least focally in 59 tumors (95%). Variant morphologies were seen in 13 (21%) and included high-grade nuclear features and various combinations of papillary, solid, and tubular architecture. Necrosis was present in 13 tumors, 7 of which showed variant morphology. All 62 tumors demonstrated loss of SDHB expression by immunohistochemistry. None showed loss of SDHA expression. Germline SDH mutations were reported in all 18 patients for whom the results of testing were known. Among patients for whom follow-up data was available, metastatic disease was reported in 9 cases, 8 of whom had necrosis and/or variant morphology in their primary tumor. Three patients died of disease. In conclusion, variant morphologies and high-grade nuclear features occur in a subset of SDH-deficient RCCs and are associated with more aggressive behavior. We therefore recommend grading all SDH-deficient RCCs and emphasize the need for a low threshold for performing SDHB immunohistochemistry in any difficult to classify renal tumor, particularly if occurring at a younger age.

• MeSH
• Adult MeSH
• Hyperplasia MeSH
• Immunohistochemistry MeSH
• Carcinoma, Renal Cell * genetics   pathology   MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Young Adult MeSH
• Kidney Neoplasms * genetics   pathology   MeSH
• Necrosis MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Succinate Dehydrogenase genetics   MeSH
• Check Tag
• Adult MeSH
• Middle Aged MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Young Adult MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Names of Substances
• Succinate Dehydrogenase MeSH

A number of recently described renal tumor entities share an eosinophilic/oncocytic morphology, somewhat solid architectural growth pattern, and tendency to present as low-stage tumors. The vast majority of such tumors follow a non-aggressive clinical behavior. In this review, we discuss the morphological, immunohistochemical, and molecular genetic profiles of the three most recent novel/emerging renal entities associated with TSC/mTOR pathway mutations. These are eosinophilic solid and cystic renal cell carcinoma, eosinophilic vacuolated tumors, and low-grade oncocytic tumors, which belong to a heterogeneous group of renal tumors, demonstrating mostly solid architecture, eosinophilic/oncocytic cytoplasm, and overlapping morphological and immunohistochemical features between renal oncocytoma and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma. All three tumors also share a molecular genetic background with mutations in the mTORC1 pathway (TSC1/TSC2/mTOR/RHEB). Despite the common genetic background, it appears that the tumors with TSC/mTOR mutations represent a diverse group of distinct renal neoplasms.

• Keywords
• ESC, EVT, LOT, chromophobe, eosinophilic, kidney, mTOR, oncocytic, renal, tumor,
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Review MeSH

(1) Background: There are limited data concerning inter-tumoral and inter-metastatic heterogeneity in clear cell renal cell carcinoma (CCRCC). The aim of our study was to review published data and to examine mutation profile variability in primary and multiple pulmonary metastases (PMs) in our cohort of four patients with metastatic CCRCC. (2) Methods: Four patients were enrolled in this study. The clinical characteristics, types of surgeries, histopathologic results, immunohistochemical and genetic evaluations of corresponding primary tumor and PMs, and follow-up data were recorded. (3) Results: In our series, the most commonly mutated genes were those in the canonically dysregulated VHL pathway, which were detected in both primary tumors and corresponding metastasis. There were genetic profile differences between primary and metastatic tumors, as well as among particular metastases in one patient. (4) Conclusions: CCRCC shows heterogeneity between the primary tumor and its metastasis. Such mutational changes may be responsible for suboptimal treatment outcomes in targeted therapy settings.

• Keywords
• clear cell renal cell carcinoma, inter-metastatic heterogeneity, inter-tumoral heterogeneity, intra-tumoral heterogeneity,
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Review MeSH