Geiersbach, Katherine

The 6th edition of the WHO Classification of Breast Tumours introduces both major and minor changes based on recent advances in our understanding of breast biology, developments in diagnostic modalities, identification of specific molecular targets and new treatment regimens necessitating modifications to pathology reporting and tumour biomarker categorisation. This review summarises the main changes that strive towards a classification of global relevance. In invasive carcinoma, predictive factors increasingly inform modern breast cancer treatment. The 6th edition provides an update on HER2 reporting categories following the DESTINY‐Breast 04 and 06 trials. Terminologies used to classify invasive tumours are clarified, with the term ‘variant’ now reserved for molecular/genetic alterations. Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) with extracellular mucin is recognised as a new diagnostic entity with prognostic implications. The diagnosis of mucinous carcinoma (MC) is reserved for mucin secreting carcinomas with grade 1 or 2 morphology and a favourable biomarker profile. The diagnosis of malignant phyllodes tumours requires only four of the original five adverse histological criteria. Classification of neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) is revised, recognising that the unified model, promoted in the 5th edition, is difficult to apply to the breast. New approaches to the classification of adenomyoepithelioma are discussed but the 5th edition system is broadly retained. A new section on ‘Small Diagnostic Samples’ outlines the merits of non‐operative biopsy diagnosis, the B coding system and the importance of multidisciplinary review. Changes to diagnostic practice and the emerging role of artificial intelligence, with advantages and challenges, are discussed in a new section on ‘Digital Pathology’.

Soft tissue aneurysmal bone cysts (STABCs) are rare neoplasms histopathologically identical to aneurysmal bone cysts. These benign lesions are characterized by thin, peripheral ossification and no skeletal continuity. STABC may be difficult to distinguish from myositis ossificans (MO) and malignant entities from imaging and fine needle aspiration, due to rarity and overlapping features. We present a case of a STABC occurring in the paraspinal cervical muscles. The imaging, histopathology, molecular analysis, and treatment are discussed. Four other published cases of STABC of the head and neck are reviewed.

AbstractAn 11‐year‐old female was referred from an outside institution after a diagnostic biopsy and subsequent excision of a progressively enlarging reddish‐brown nodule demonstrated features concerning for a balloon cell nevus with severe atypia versus a high‐grade melanocytoma. Upon review of the initial biopsy specimen and molecular data, we favored the diagnosis to be consistent with a high‐grade melanocytoma with balloon cell changes while considering the possibility of balloon cell melanoma due to concerning histopathologic and genetic abnormalities. In this case study, we discuss critical diagnostic considerations in this rare pediatric case and highlight important pathologic and clinical features of melanocytomas and balloon cell melanoma.

Abstract Objectives We investigated the impact of our laboratory’s reflex testing process for resolving ERBB2 (HER2) status on breast cancer samples that require additional workup after fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), per guideline recommendations published in 2018 by the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the College of American Pathologists (CAP). Methods In total, 500 breast cancer specimens with ERBB2 FISH results in groups 2 through 4 (all reported as immunohistochemistry [IHC] equivocal [2+] at external laboratories) were resubmitted for IHC testing in our laboratory. Per the ASCO/CAP guideline, FISH was rescored when internal IHC was also equivocal (2+), targeted to tumor areas demonstrating more intense IHC staining, if observed. Results Reflex IHC/FISH testing changed the final reported ERBB2 status in 185 of 500 (37.0%) samples. Result changes included discordant IHC (n = 4 score 0, n = 132 score 1+, and n = 16 score 3+) and discordant FISH (n = 33). Numerical differences in FISH scores were comparable for targeted vs nontargeted FISH rescoring (P = .086 for ERBB2 copy number; P = .49 for ERBB2 ratio). Two cases showed larger differences in FISH scores, suggesting heterogeneity. Conclusions Retesting of breast cancer samples with equivocal IHC frequently changes IHC results, but targeted reanalysis of borderline FISH results rarely identifies significant differences in ERBB2 copy number or ratio.

Context.— Guidelines for HER2 testing in breast cancer have changed over time, from the US Food and Drug Administration guideline to the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)/College of American Pathologists (CAP) guidelines published in 2007, 2013, and 2018. Objective.— To investigate the change in assignment of HER2 status in breast cancers with equivocal (2+) immunohistochemistry (IHC) results by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) following implementation of the ASCO/CAP 2018 guideline. Design.— The study included 3556 invasive breast cancers that were HER2 equivocal (2+) by IHC and were submitted to our FISH laboratory after July 2018. Reflex testing (with repeat IHC staining) was performed on certain categories of FISH results known as groups 2, 3, and 4. Concomitant review of IHC and FISH was performed on these reflex cases per 2018 guideline recommendations. The FISH data were analyzed to compare US Food and Drug Administration and ASCO/CAP 2007, 2013, and 2018 interpretations. Results.— Of 3548 invasive breast cancers with complete data available, the percentage agreement for FISH according to different guidelines was highest for ASCO/CAP 2018 versus US Food and Drug Administration (96.5%), followed by ASCO/CAP 2018 versus 2007 (93.8%), and lowest with ASCO/CAP 2018 versus 2013 (83.7%). Per the 2018 guideline, reflex IHC testing was performed on 633 breast cancers (17.8%); the majority of reflex testing results were negative (541 of 633; 85.5%). The overall distribution of HER2 FISH results (per the 2018 guideline) was 88.5% negative and 11.5% positive. Conclusions.— By eliminating the equivocal FISH category, the 2018 ASCO/CAP guideline significantly reduced the HER2 FISH–positive rate in tumors with equivocal (2+) IHC results.

AbstractPrimary aneurysmal bone cyst (ABC) is a benign multiloculated cystic lesion of bone that is defined cytogenetically by USP6 gene rearrangements. Rearrangements involving USP6 are promoter swaps, usually generated by fusion of the noncoding upstream exons of different partner genes with exon 1 or 2 of USP6, thus leading to transcriptional upregulation of full‐length USP6 coding sequence. Testing for USP6 rearrangements is used diagnostically to distinguish it from secondary ABC and other giant cell‐rich primary bone tumors. In this report, we present a case of a 16‐year‐old male with a primary ABC of the left distal femur. USP6 break apart fluorescence in situ hybridization was positive for a rearrangement and conventional chromosome analysis identified a reciprocal X;17 translocation. In order to identify the putative USP6 fusion partner, we performed RNA sequencing and uncovered a novel USP9X‐USP6 promoter swap fusion. This result was confirmed by reverse transcription‐polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) and by mate pair sequencing thus showing the utility of these alternative methodologies in identifying novel fusion candidates. Ubiquitin‐specific protease 9X (USP9X), like USP6, encodes a highly conserved substrate‐specific deubiquitylating enzyme. USP9X is highly expressed in a number of tissue types and acts as both an oncogene and tumor suppressor in several human cancers. We conclude that oncogenic activation of USP6 via USP9X promoter exchange represents a novel driver of primary ABC formation.

AbstractObjectiveAcute myeloid leukemia (AML) can be subtyped based on recurrent cytogenetic and molecular genetic abnormalities with diagnostic and prognostic significance. Although cytogenetic characterization classically involves conventional chromosome and/or fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) assays, limitations of these techniques include poor resolution and the inability to precisely identify breakpoints.MethodWe evaluated whether an NGS‐based methodology that detects structural abnormalities and copy number changes using mate pair sequencing (MPseq) can enhance the diagnostic yield for patients with AML.ResultsUsing 68 known abnormal and 20 karyotypically normal AML samples, each recurrent primary AML‐specific abnormality previously identified in the abnormal samples was confirmed using MPseq. Importantly, in eight cases with abnormalities that could not be resolved by conventional cytogenetic studies, MPseq was utilized to molecularly define eight recurrent AML‐fusion events. In addition, MPseq uncovered two cryptic abnormalities that were missed by conventional cytogenetic studies. Thus, MPseq improved the diagnostic yield in the detection of AML‐specific structural rearrangements in 10/88 (11%) of cases analyzed.ConclusionUtilization of MPseq represents a precise, molecular‐based technique that can be used as an alternative to conventional cytogenetic studies for newly diagnosed AML patients with the potential to revolutionize the diagnosis of hematologic malignancies.

Context.— Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and brightfield in situ hybridization (ISH) are 2 clinically approved laboratory methods for detecting ERBB2 (HER2) amplification in breast cancer. Objective.— To compare the performance of FISH and brightfield ISH on proficiency testing administered by the College of American Pathologists Laboratory Accreditation Program. Design.— Retrospective review was performed on 70 tissue core samples in 7 separate proficiency testing surveys conducted between 2009 and 2013. Results.— The samples included 13 consensus-amplified tissue cores, 53 consensus-nonamplified cores, and 4 cores that did not reach consensus for FISH and/or brightfield ISH. There were 2552 individual responses for FISH and 1871 individual responses for brightfield ISH. Consensus response rates were comparable for FISH (2474 of 2524; 98.0%) and brightfield ISH (2135 of 2189; 97.5%). The FISH analysis yielded an average HER2 copy number per cell that was significantly higher (by 2.86; P = .02) compared with brightfield ISH for amplified cores. For nonamplified cores, FISH yielded slightly, but not significantly, higher (by 0.17; P = .10) HER2 copy numbers per cell. There was no significant difference in the average HER2 to control ratio for either consensus-amplified or consensus-nonamplified cores. Participants reported “unable to analyze” more frequently for brightfield ISH (244 of 2453; 9.9%) than they did for FISH (160 of 2684; 6.0%). Conclusions.— Our study indicates a high concordance rate in proficiency testing surveys, with some significant differences noted in the technical performance of these assays. In borderline cases, updated American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists cutoff thresholds that place greater emphasis on HER2 copy number per cell could accentuate those differences between FISH and brightfield ISH.