Cooper, Wendy 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.

Context.— Accurate diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) requires multidisciplinary diagnosis that includes clinical, radiologic, and often pathologic assessment. In 2018, the American Thoracic Society, European Respiratory Society, Japanese Respiratory Society, and the Latin American Thoracic Society (ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT) and the Fleischner Society each published guidelines for the diagnosis of IPF, which include criteria for 4 categories of confidence of a histologic usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) pattern. Objective.— To (1) identify the role of the guidelines in pathologic assessment of UIP; (2) analyze the 4 guideline categories, including potential areas of difficulty; and (3) determine steps the Pulmonary Pathology Society and the greater pulmonary pathology community can take to improve current guideline criteria and histopathologic diagnosis of interstitial lung disease. Data Sources.— Data were derived from the guidelines, published literature, and clinical experience. Conclusions.— Both guidelines provide pathologists with a tool to relay to the clinician the likelihood that a biopsy represents UIP, and serve as an adjunct, not a replacement, for traditional histologic diagnosis. There are multiple challenges with implementing the guidelines, including (1) lack of clarity on the quantity and quality of histologic findings required, (2) lack of recognition that histologic features cannot be assessed independently, and (3) lack of guidance on how pathologists should incorporate clinical and radiographic information. Current criteria for “probable UIP” and “indeterminate for UIP” hinder accurate reflection of the likelihood of IPF. These challenges highlight the need for further morphologic-based investigations in the field of pulmonary pathology.