Search

The RYTHMIC network, supported by the French National Cancer Institute is dedicated to the management of patients with thymic epithelial tumors through regional and national multidisciplinary tumor boards. Tumor board decisions are based on the initial pathology diagnoses. However, following clinical inclusion in the network, a central pathology review is organized, implicating a panel of pathologists, for histotype and stage classification, which is different from a classical second opinion from pathologist to pathologist for a difficult case. Thanks to the participation of all French pathologists, more than 1000 cases have been reviewed by the panel. The aim of this review is to share with the French pathology community, the experience of the group. It underlines the importance of macroscopy and surgeon-pathologist involvement to allow a good central review, the main histopathological and immunophenotypical patterns of the most frequent thymomas and thymic carcinoma types, the differential diagnoses, as well as the difficulties for the panel to reproducibly assess on slides, stage, for some cases., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Management of NSCLC patients is more and more individualized especially on the base of bioguided treatments. In order to guarantee an access for all the patients too this type of strategy, the French NCI supports since 2006 a nationwide network of 28 regional genetics center. The financial support is based on public funds. The French NCI recommends today the assessment of seven biomarkers for all stage IV non squamous NSCLC patients. Due to financial and technical reasons, this recommendation must be followed. However, the molecular profiling of lung cancer patients would ideally be extended across all stages and all histological types of the disease in order to improve our knowledge in this field and provides the patient with an opportunity to access a bioguided treatment as frequently as possible.

We examined a series of 667 patients with node-negative breast carcinomas in order to identify prognostic immunohistochemical molecular signatures for the prediction of early metastasis, and potential new therapeutic targets. We used a standardized quantitative immunocytochemical approach with 37 antibodies, based on high-throughput tissue microarrays and image analysis, and analyzed the results with respect to metastatic status after a mean follow-up of 86 months. Complete data were obtained for 586 patients. The predictive value of the markers was first analyzed individually by univariate analysis (log rank test) in 586 node-negative tumors, according to metastatic status during follow-up. Twenty-seven markers had significant prognostic value. ROC curve analysis (logistic regression) was then used to determine the marker combination that best classified the patients with and without metastases. A 15-marker signature (Bcl2, P16, P21, P27, P53, CD34, CA IX, c-kit, FGF-R1, P38, JAK, pSTAT3, CK9, STAT1 and ER) correctly classified 84.8% of the patients (sensitivity 85.5%, specificity 84.6%). When ER, PR and c-erb B2 were excluded from the analysis, a very similar signature, in which CK8-18 replaced ER, correctly classified 83.6% of the patients (sensitivity 84.5%, specificity 83.4%). These results show that quantitative immunoprofiling, independently of ER, PR and c-erb B2 status, can provide a basal-like signature, can properly predict the metastatic risk of node-negative breast carcinomas at diagnostic time. This may be helpful for selecting patients who do not need aggressive adjuvant chemotherapy, and for developing tailored therapies.