Search

The classification of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expression is optimized to detect HER2-amplified breast cancer (BC). However, novel HER2-targeting agents are also effective for BCs with low levels of HER2. This raises the question whether the current guidelines for HER2 testing are sufficiently reproducible to identify HER2-low BC. The aim of this multicenter international study was to assess the interobserver agreement of specific HER2 immunohistochemistry scores in cases with negative HER2 results (0, 1+, or 2+/in situ hybridization negative) according to the current American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists (ASCO/CAP) guidelines. Furthermore, we evaluated whether the agreement improved by redefining immunohistochemistry (IHC) scoring criteria or by adding fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). We conducted a 2-round study of 105 nonamplified BCs. During the first assessment, 16 pathologists used the latest version of the ASCO/CAP guidelines. After a consensus meeting, the same pathologists scored the same digital slides using modified IHC scoring criteria based on the 2007 ASCO/CAP guidelines, and an extra "ultralow" category was added. Overall, the interobserver agreement was limited (4.7% of cases with 100% agreement) in the first round, but this was improved by clustering IHC categories. In the second round, the highest reproducibility was observed when comparing IHC 0 with the ultralow/1+/2+ grouped cluster (74.3% of cases with 100% agreement). The FISH results were not statistically different between HER2-0 and HER2-low cases, regardless of the IHC criteria used. In conclusion, our study suggests that the modified 2007 ASCO/CAP criteria were more reproducible in distinguishing HER2-0 from HER2-low cases than the 2018 ASCO/CAP criteria. However, the reproducibility was still moderate, which was not improved by adding FISH. This could lead to a suboptimal selection of patients eligible for novel HER2-targeting agents. If the threshold between HER2 IHC 0 and 1+ is to be clinically actionable, there is a need for clearer, more reproducible IHC definitions, training, and/or development of more accurate methods to detect this subtle difference in protein expression levels., (Copyright © 2022 United States & Canadian Academy of Pathology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The 5-year survival for patients with esophageal carcinoma remains poor despite neoadjuvant therapy and surgery. The eighth American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging, based on the neoadjuvant treated TNM (ypTNM) stage of the resection specimen, is used for prognosis. Tumor characteristics such as tumor grade, subtype of adenocarcinoma, and tumor regression scores are not included in this classification. This study aimed to determine the impact of these tumor characteristics on overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS)., Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 228 patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma. Tumor regression was determined by the Mandard tumor regression (MTR) score. Subtype and grade of adenocarcinoma were confirmed using either the preoperative biopsy or residual tumor tissue after surgery. The MTR was modified to a three-tier classification. The study classified MTR 1 and 2 in one group as a "major response," with MTR 4 and 5 classified in one group as a "minimal response.", Results: The median follow-up period was 2.1 years. Combining MTR with AJCC staging did not improve the prognostic value for the prediction of OS. However, the multivariate analysis showed that the prognostic value of AJCC staging for DFS was improved by adding the three-tiered MTR (odds ratio for MTR4+5: 2.46; 95 % confidence interval, 1.07-5.67). Grade or subtype correlated with neither OS nor DFS in the univariate analyses and did not improve the prognostic value of the AJCC staging., Conclusion: Neither adenocarcinoma subtype nor grade influenced OS or DFS. However, the eighth AJCC staging combined with a three-tier MTR provided a better prognostic tool for DFS in esophageal adenocarcinoma treated with esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy., (© 2022. Society of Surgical Oncology.)

Humanized mouse models can well be modified to study specific aspects of Graft-versus-Host Disease (GvHD). This paper shows the results of both macrophage depletion and (early) B-cell depletion in a humanized mouse model using RAG2 -/- γ c -/- mice injected with HuPBMCs. Macrophage depletion showed a significant decrease in survival and also lead to a change in the histomorphology of the xenogeneic reaction. Higher levels of infiltrating B-cells were observed in various organs of mice depleted for macrophages. With (early) B-cell depletion using Rituximab, a clear improvement on clinical symptoms was observed, even when probably only inactivated B-cells were deleted. However, the histological examinations only showed a significant morphological effect on liver fibrosis. This may be related to a difference in the mRNA levels of TGF- β . Also, lower mRNA levels of Tregs in some organs were observed after Rituximab treatment, which contradicts that a higher number of Tregs would always be related to less severe GvHD. Our data show that both macrophage depletion and (early) B-cell depletion in a xenogeneic mouse model can influence the clinical, histological, and cytokine production of a GvHD response.

Background: Skin biopsies are often used in daily practice for the diagnosis of acute (aGvHD) or chronic graft versus host disease (cGvHD). With the latest understanding in pathogenesis and new National Institute of Health (NIH) classifications for aGvHD and cGvHD, there is a need to evaluate the current prognostic value of histological grading cutaneous GvHD and its correlation to the clinical grade., Methods: In a retrospective study with 120 skin biopsies (all taken for suspected GvHD) from 110 patients (all classified according to the NIH), biopsies were revised and graded, blinded for clinical information, for either acute of chronic features. Morphological grades were compared for concordance with the clinical grade and survival analyses were done for clinical and histological grading., Results: Correlation for histologic vs. clinical grading was (very) poor for aGvHD and cGvHD (weighted κ - 0.038 and 0.0009, respectively). Patients with clinical aGvHD had worse prognosis compared to cGvHD. However, at time of biopsy neither clinical nor histological grading predicted the eventual survival for either aGvHD (p = 0.9739 and p = 0.0744, respectively) or cGvHD (p = 0.2149 and p = 0.4465, respectively)., Conclusions: Confirming the diagnosis of GvHD is still a valuable reason for taking a skin biopsy, but this study shows that histologic grading of GvHD in the skin biopsy has no additional value for clinicians in current practice.

Introduction: Epigenetic events are, along with genetic alteration, important in the development and progression of cancer. Promoter hypermethylation causes gene silencing and is thought to be an early event in carcinogenesis. The role of promoter hypermethylation in male breast cancer has not yet been studied., Methods: In a group of 108 male breast cancers, the methylation status of 25 genes was studied using methylation-specific multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification. Methylation of more than 15% was regarded indicative for promoter hypermethylation. Methylation status was correlated with clinicopathological features, with patients' outcome and with 28 female breast cancer cases., Results: Promoter hypermethylation of the genes MSH6, WT1, PAX5, CDH13, GATA5 and PAX6 was seen in more than 50% of the cases, but was uncommon or absent in normal male breast tissue. High overall methylation status was correlated with high grade (P = 0.003) and was an independent predictor of poor survival (P = 0.048; hazard ratio 2.5). ESR1 and GSTP1 hypermethylation were associated with high mitotic count (P = 0.037 and P = 0.002, respectively) and high grade (both P = 0.001). No correlation with survival was seen for individual genes. Compared with female breast cancers (logistic regression), promoter hypermethylation was less common in a variety of genes, particularly ESR1 (P = 0.005), BRCA1 (P = 0.010) and BRCA2 (P < 0.001). The most frequently hypermethylated genes (MSH6, CDH13, PAX5, PAX6 and WT1) were similar for male and female breast cancer., Conclusion: Promoter hypermethylation is common in male breast cancer and high methylation status correlates with aggressive phenotype and poor survival. ESR1 and GSTP1 promoter hypermethylation seem to be involved in development and/or progression of high-grade male breast cancer. Although female and male breast cancer share a set of commonly methylated genes, many of the studied genes are less frequently methylated in male breast cancer, pointing towards possible differences between male and female breast carcinogenesis.