Zhang, Xinmin

ABSTRACT The World Health Organization (WHO) 5th Edition and International Consensus Classification (ICC) have continued to delineate more genetically defined acute leukemias. Both recognize genetic aberrations associated with myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS) as defining MDS‐related AML (AML‐MR). Mutations in RUNX1 are included in this category in the ICC, but not WHO. The current classifications are unclear on how acute leukemias with ambiguous lineage (ALAL), including those of mixed lineage (MPAL) and those without a defined lineage (AUL), should be categorized in the presence of such mutations. Our multi‐institutional study aims to determine the significance of RUNX1 mutation in ALAL compared to de novo AML. Newly diagnosed MPAL, AUL, and AML with RUNX1 mutations were collected. ALAL with MDS‐related cytogenetics, BCR::ABL1 , KMT2A rearrangements, or ZNF384 or BCL11b abnormalities were excluded. We analyzed 17 cases of ALAL and 71 cases of AML that met inclusion criteria. ALAL‐ RUNX1 and AML‐ RUNX1 showed overlapping mutational landscapes with frequent comutations in MDS‐associated genes. No ALAL‐ RUNX1 or AML‐ RUNX1 cases showed concomitant TP53 mutation. ALAL‐ RUNX1 had more bone marrow blasts and more karyotypic abnormalities; however, neither impacted survival, nor did RUNX1 variant allele frequency (VAF). Survival analysis revealed similarly poor outcomes between them. AML‐directed therapies and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant trended toward improved survival in ALAL‐ RUNX1; however, it did not reach significance. Our results suggest ALAL‐ RUNX1 is associated with younger age, higher blasts, and more karyotypic abnormalities, but has similar clinical and genetic features and outcomes to AML‐ RUNX1 . Our findings suggest, like other MR mutations, RUNX1 ‐mutated ALALs should be included within AML‐MR.

Context.— The utility of immunohistochemistry (IHC) in breast lesions needs to be updated with exceptions among these lesions. Biomarker studies with IHC in triple-negative breast carcinoma may help develop targeted therapies for this aggressive breast cancer. The distinction of metastatic lung adenocarcinoma to the breast and invasive breast carcinoma has significant prognostic and therapeutic implications. The determination can be challenging because both primary tumors can express estrogen receptor and/or HER2 by IHC, creating a diagnostic dilemma. Objectives.— To provide a practical update on the use of IHC markers in differential diagnoses in breast lesions, including benign, atypical, precancerous, and malignant tumors; to highlight recently published research findings on novel IHC markers in triple-negative breast carcinoma cases; and to reinforce the importance of IHC use as an ancillary tool in distinguishing metastatic lung adenocarcinoma to the breast from primary breast carcinoma using real case examples. Data Sources.— PubMed (US National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, Maryland) literature review and authors' research data and personal experiences were used in this review. Conclusions.— Immunohistochemistry has an important role in making differential diagnoses in breast lesions in morphologically equivocal settings; recognizing IHC expression status in the exceptions among these lesions will aid in the correct diagnosis of challenging breast cases. Studies suggest that androgen receptor, p16, p53, GATA3, and PELP1 may have potential diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive value in triple-negative breast carcinoma cases; these findings may provide insight and a greater understanding of the tumor biology in triple-negative breast carcinomas. In distinguishing metastatic estrogen receptor–positive or HER2+ lung adenocarcinoma to the breast from primary breast carcinoma, napsin A, TTF-1, and GATA3 comprise a useful IHC panel.