The International Society of Urological Pathology 2012 Consensus Conference made recommendations regarding classification, prognostic factors, staging, and immunohistochemical and molecular assessment of adult renal tumors. Issues relating to prognostic factors were coordinated by a workgroup who identified tumor morphotype, sarcomatoid/rhabdoid differentiation, tumor necrosis, grading, and microvascular invasion as potential prognostic parameters. There was consensus that the main morphotypes of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) were of prognostic significance, that subtyping of papillary RCC (types 1 and 2) provided additional prognostic information, and that clear cell tubulopapillary RCC was associated with a more favorable outcome. For tumors showing sarcomatoid or rhabdoid differentiation, there was consensus that a minimum proportion of tumor was not required for diagnostic purposes. It was also agreed upon that the underlying subtype of carcinoma should be reported. For sarcomatoid carcinoma, it was further agreed upon that if the underlying carcinoma subtype was absent the tumor should be classified as a grade 4 unclassified carcinoma with a sarcomatoid component. Tumor necrosis was considered to have prognostic significance, with assessment based on macroscopic and microscopic examination of the tumor. It was recommended that for clear cell RCC the amount of necrosis should be quantified. There was consensus that nucleolar prominence defined grades 1 to 3 of clear cell and papillary RCCs, whereas extreme nuclear pleomorphism or sarcomatoid and/or rhabdoid differentiation defined grade 4 tumors. It was agreed upon that chromophobe RCC should not be graded. There was consensus that microvascular invasion should not be included as a staging criterion for RCC.

Context.— Controversies and uncertainty persist in prostate cancer grading. Objective.— To update grading recommendations. Data Sources.— Critical review of the literature along with pathology and clinician surveys. Conclusions.— Percent Gleason pattern 4 (%GP4) is as follows: (1) report %GP4 in needle biopsy with Grade Groups (GrGp) 2 and 3, and in needle biopsy on other parts (jars) of lower grade in cases with at least 1 part showing Gleason score (GS) 4 + 4 = 8; and (2) report %GP4: less than 5% or less than 10% and 10% increments thereafter. Tertiary grade patterns are as follows: (1) replace “tertiary grade pattern” in radical prostatectomy (RP) with “minor tertiary pattern 5 (TP5),” and only use in RP with GrGp 2 or 3 with less than 5% Gleason pattern 5; and (2) minor TP5 is noted along with the GS, with the GrGp based on the GS. Global score and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-targeted biopsies are as follows: (1) when multiple undesignated cores are taken from a single MRI-targeted lesion, an overall grade for that lesion is given as if all the involved cores were one long core; and (2) if providing a global score, when different scores are found in the standard and the MRI-targeted biopsy, give a single global score (factoring both the systematic standard and the MRI-targeted positive cores). Grade Groups are as follows: (1) Grade Groups (GrGp) is the terminology adopted by major world organizations; and (2) retain GS 3 + 5 = 8 in GrGp 4. Cribriform carcinoma is as follows: (1) report the presence or absence of cribriform glands in biopsy and RP with Gleason pattern 4 carcinoma. Intraductal carcinoma (IDC-P) is as follows: (1) report IDC-P in biopsy and RP; (2) use criteria based on dense cribriform glands (>50% of the gland is composed of epithelium relative to luminal spaces) and/or solid nests and/or marked pleomorphism/necrosis; (3) it is not necessary to perform basal cell immunostains on biopsy and RP to identify IDC-P if the results would not change the overall (highest) GS/GrGp part per case; (4) do not include IDC-P in determining the final GS/GrGp on biopsy and/or RP; and (5) “atypical intraductal proliferation (AIP)” is preferred for an intraductal proliferation of prostatic secretory cells which shows a greater degree of architectural complexity and/or cytological atypia than typical high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia, yet falling short of the strict diagnostic threshold for IDC-P. Molecular testing is as follows: (1) Ki67 is not ready for routine clinical use; (2) additional studies of active surveillance cohorts are needed to establish the utility of PTEN in this setting; and (3) dedicated studies of RNA-based assays in active surveillance populations are needed to substantiate the utility of these expensive tests in this setting. Artificial intelligence and novel grading schema are as follows: (1) incorporating reactive stromal grade, percent GP4, minor tertiary GP5, and cribriform/intraductal carcinoma are not ready for adoption in current practice.

Purpose To evaluate the capability of amide proton transfer (APT) MR imaging for detection of prostate cancer that typically shows a higher tumor cell proliferation rate and cellular density leading to an MRI-detectable overall elevated mobile protein level in higher grade tumors. Materials and Methods Twelve patients with biopsy-proven prostate cancer were imaged on a 3 Tesla MR imaging system before prostatectomy. APT-MR images were acquired by means of a single-slice single-shot turbo spin echo sequence with a saturation prepulse preparation using 33 different frequency offsets (−8 to 8 ppm, interval 0.5 ppm). For quantification we used the APT ratio (APTR) based on the asymmetry of the magnetization transfer ratio at 3.5 ppm in respect to the water signal. Tumor and peripheral zone benign regions of interest (ROIs) were delineated based on whole mount pathology slides after prostatectomy. Results APTR in prostate cancer ROIs was 5.8% 6 3.2%, significantly higher than that in the peripheral zone benign regions (0.3% ± 3.2%, P = 0.002). Conclusion APT-MR imaging is feasible in prostate cancer detection and has the potential to discriminate between cancer and noncancer tissues.

Tumor reinitiating cancer stem-like cells are responsible for cancer recurrence associated with conventional chemotherapy. We developed a doxorubicin-encapsulated polymeric nanoparticle surface-decorated with chitosan that can specifically target the CD44 receptors of these cells. This nanoparticle system was engineered to release the doxorubicin in acidic environments, which occurs when the nanoparticles are localized in the acidic tumor microenvironment and when they are internalized and localized in the cellular endosomes/lysosomes. This nanoparticle design strategy increases the cytotoxicity of the doxorubicin by six times in comparison to the use of free doxorubicin for eliminating CD44(+) cancer stem-like cells residing in 3D mammary tumor spheroids (i.e., mammospheres). We further show these nanoparticles reduced the size of tumors in an orthotopic xenograft tumor model with no evident systemic toxicity. The development of nanoparticle system to target cancer stem-like cells with low systemic toxicity provides a new treatment arsenal for improving the survival of cancer patients.

Glypican 3 (GPC3), a membrane-bound heparin sulfate proteoglycan, may play a role in promoting embryonic cell growth and differentiation. GPC3 is mutated in Simpson-Golabi-Behmel syndrome, characterized by tissue overgrowth and an increased risk of embryonal malignancies. Recently, GPC3 was reported to be one of the over-expressed genes in testicular yolk sac tumors by gene expression microarray analysis. However, the presence of the GPC3 protein in germ cell tumors has never been investigated. The purpose of the study was to investigate the GPC3 expression in various histologic components of testicular germ cell tumors using immunohistochemistry and to assess its possible utility as a diagnostic marker. Tumors from 71 patients were examined, including components of 42 seminomas, 37 embryonal carcinomas, 24 yolk sac tumors, 20 teratomas with mature elements, 16 teratomas with immature elements, and 7 choriocarcinomas. Cytoplasmic and membranous immunoreactivity was semiquantitatively evaluated. All yolk sac tumor (24/24) and choriocarcinoma (7/7) components were immunoreactive for GPC3, whereas only 38% of teratomas with immature elements and 8% of embryonal carcinomas expressed GPC3. There was no immunoreactivity in benign testicular tissue, intratubular germ cell neoplasia, seminomas (0/42), or teratomas with mature elements (0/20). We conclude that the oncofetal protein GPC3 is a novel immunohistochemical marker in testicular germ cell tumors with differential expression in defined histologic subtypes. Our findings suggest a possible role of GPC3 in tumor cell differentiation. Furthermore, GPC immunostaining may be useful in the pathologic diagnosis of nonseminomatous germ cell tumors, particularly yolk sac tumor, and choriocarcinoma.