den Bakker, Michael A

Aims Thymic epithelial tumours (TET), including thymomas and thymic carcinomas and thymic neuroendocrine neoplasms, are malignant neoplasms that can be associated with morbidity and mortality. Recently, an updated version of the World Health Organization (WHO) Classification of Thoracic Tumours 5th Edition, 2021 has been released, which included various changes to the classification of these neoplasms. In addition, in 2017 the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) / American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) published the 8th Edition Staging Manual which, for the first time, includes a TNM staging that is applicable to thymomas, thymic carcinomas, and thymic neuroendocrine neoplasms. Methods and Results To standardize reporting of resected TET and thymic neuroendocrine neoplasms the accrediting bodies updated their reporting protocols. The International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR), which represents a collaboration between various National Associations of Pathology, updated its 2017 histopathology reporting guide on TET and thymic neuroendocrine neoplasms accordingly. This report will highlight important changes in the reporting of TET and thymic neuroendocrine neoplasms based on the 2021 WHO, emphasize the 2017 TNM staging, and also comment on the rigour and various uncertainties for the pathologist when trying to follow that staging. Conclusion The ICCR dataset provides a comprehensive, standardized template for reporting of resected TET and thymic neuroendocrine neoplasms.

AimsThymic tumours are rare in routine pathology practice. Although the World Health Organization (WHO) classification describes a number of well‐defined categories, the classification remains challenging. The aim of this study was to investigate the reproducibility of the WHO classification among a large group of international pathologists with expertise in thymic pathology and by using whole slide imaging to facilitate rapid diagnostic turnover.Methods and resultsThree hundred and five tumours, consisting of 90 biopsies and 215 resection specimens, were reviewed with a panel‐based virtual microscopy approach by a group of 13 pathologists with expertise in thymic tumours over a period of 6 years. The specimens were classified according to the WHO 2015 classification. The data were subjected to statistical analysis, and interobserver concordance (Fleiss kappa) was calculated. All cases were diagnosed within a time frame of 2 weeks. The overall level of agreement was substantial (κ = 0.6762), and differed slightly between resection specimens (κ = 0.7281) and biopsies (κ = 0.5955). When analysis was limited to thymomas only, and they were grouped according to the European Society for Medical Oncology Clinical Practice Guidelines into B2, B3 versus A, AB, B1 and B3 versus A, AB, B1, B2, the level of agreement decreased slightly (κ = 0.5506 and κ = 0.4929, respectively). Difficulties arose in distinguishing thymoma from thymic carcinoma. Within the thymoma subgroup, difficulties in distinction were seen within the B group.ConclusionsAgreement in diagnosing thymic lesions is substantial when they are assessed by pathologists with experience of these rare tumours. Digital pathology decreases the turnaround time and facilitates access to what is essentially a multinational resource. This platform provides a template for dealing with rare tumours for which expertise is sparse.