Hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell carcinoma syndrome-associated renal cell carcinomas (RCC) are difficult to diagnose prospectively. We used immunohistochemistry (IHC) to identify fumarate hydratase (FH)-deficient tumors (defined as FH negative, 2-succinocysteine [2SC] positive) in cases diagnosed as "unclassified RCC, high grade or with papillary pattern," or "papillary RCC type 2," from multiple institutions. A total of 124 tumors (from 118 patients) were evaluated by IHC for FH and 2SC. An FH deficiency was found in 24/124 (19%) cases. An indeterminate result (only 1 marker abnormal) was found in 27/124 (22%) cases. In a tissue microarray of 776 RCCs of different types, only 2 (0.5%) tumors, initially considered papillary type 2, were FH deficient. FH mutations were found in 19/21 FH-deficient tumors (with confirmed germline mutations in 9 of 9 tumors in which germline status could be assessed) and in 1/26 FH-indeterminate tumors identified by IHC. No FH mutations were found in 2/21 FH-deficient RCCs, 25/26 FH-indeterminate RCCs, and 10/10 RCCs demonstrating FH expression by IHC. Patients with FH-deficient RCC had a median age of 44 years (range, 21 to 65 y). Average tumor size was 8.2 cm (range, 0.9 to 18 cm). FH-deficient RCCs were characterized by at least focal macronucleoli and demonstrated 2 or more growth patterns in 93% cases. Papillary was the most common (74%) and dominant (59%) pattern, whereas other common patterns included: solid (44%), tubulocystic (41%), cribriform (41%), and cystic (33%). At presentation, 57% were stage ≥pT3, 52% had positive nodes, and 19% had distant metastases. After a mean follow-up of 27 months (range, 1 to 114 mo), 39% of patients were dead of disease, and 26% had disease progression. We conclude that FH and 2SC are useful IHC ancillary tools, which allow recognition of FH-deficient RCC.

Hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell carcinoma (HLRCC) syndrome secondary to germline fumarate hydratase (FH) mutation presents with cutaneous and uterine leiomyomas, and a distinctive aggressive renal carcinoma. Identification of HLRCC patients presenting first with uterine leiomyomas may allow early intervention for renal carcinoma. We reviewed the morphology and immunohistochemical (IHC) findings in patients with uterine leiomyomas and confirmed or presumed HLRCC. IHC was also performed on a tissue microarray of unselected uterine leiomyomas and leiomyosarcomas. FH-deficient leiomyomas underwent Sanger and massively parallel sequencing on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue. All 5 patients with HLRCC had at least 1 FH-deficient leiomyoma: defined as completely negative FH staining with positive internal controls. One percent (12/1152) of unselected uterine leiomyomas but 0 of 88 leiomyosarcomas were FH deficient. FH-deficient leiomyoma patients were younger (42.7 vs. 48.8 y, P=0.024) and commonly demonstrated a distinctive hemangiopericytomatous vasculature. Other features reported to be associated with FH-deficient leiomyomas (hypercellularity, nuclear atypia, inclusion-like nucleoli, stromal edema) were inconstantly present. Somatic FH mutations were identified in 6 of 10 informative unselected FH-deficient leiomyomas. None of these mutations were found in the germline. We conclude that, while the great majority of patients with HLRCC will have FH-deficient leiomyomas, 1% of all uterine leiomyomas are FH deficient usually due to somatic inactivation. Although IHC screening for FH may have a role in confirming patients at high risk for hereditary disease before genetic testing, prospective identification of FH-deficient leiomyomas is of limited clinical benefit in screening unselected patients because of the relatively high incidence of somatic mutations.

The spectrum of the renal oncocytic tumors has been expanded in recent years to include several novel and emerging entities. We describe a cohort of novel, hitherto unrecognized and morphologically distinct high-grade oncocytic tumors (HOT), currently diagnosed as "unclassified" in the WHO classification. We identified 14 HOT by searching multiple institutional archives. Morphologic, immunohistochemical (IHC), molecular genetic, and molecular karyotyping studies were performed to investigate these tumors. The patients included 3 men and 11 women, with age range from 25 to 73 years (median 50, mean 49 years). Tumor size ranged from 1.5 to 7.0 cm in the greatest dimension (median 3, mean 3.4 cm). The tumors were all pT1 stage. Microscopically, they showed nested to solid growth, and focal tubulocystic architecture. The neoplastic cells were uniform with voluminous oncocytic cytoplasm. Prominent intracytoplasmic vacuoles were frequently seen, but no irregular (raisinoid) nuclei or perinuclear halos were present. All tumors demonstrated prominent nucleoli (WHO/ISUP grade 3 equivalent). Nine of 14 cases were positive for CD117 and cytokeratin (CK) 7 was either negative or only focally positive in of 6/14 cases. All tumors were positive for AE1-AE3, CK18, PAX 8, antimitochondrial antigen, and SDHB. Cathepsin K was positive in 13/14 cases and CD10 was positive in 12/13 cases. All cases were negative for TFE3, HMB45, Melan-A. No TFEB and TFE3 genes rearrangement was found in analyzable cases. By array CGH, complete chromosomal losses or gains were not found in any of the cases, and 3/9 cases showed absence of any abnormalities. Chromosomal losses were detected on chromosome 19 (4/9), 3 with losses of the short arm (p) and 1 with losses of both arms (p and q). Loss of chromosome 1 was found in 3/9 cases; gain of 5q was found in 1/9 cases. On molecular karyotyping, 3/3 evaluated cases showed loss of heterozygosity (LOH) on 16p11.2-11.1 and 2/3 cases showed LOH at 7q31.31. Copy number (CN) losses were found at 7q11.21 (3/3), Xp11.21 (3/3), Xp11.22-11.21 (3/3), and Xq24-25 (2/3). CN gains were found at 13q34 (2/3). Ten patients with available follow up information were alive and without disease progression, after a mean follow-up of 28 months (1 to 112 months). HOT is a tumor with unique morphology and its IHC profile appears mostly consistent. HOT should be considered as an emerging renal entity because it does not meet the diagnostic criteria for other recognized eosinophilic renal tumors, such as oncocytoma, chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (RCC), TFE3 and TFEB RCC, SDH-deficient RCC, and eosinophilic solid and cystic RCC.

Aim To describe a group of distinct low‐grade oncocytic renal tumours that demonstrate CD117 negative/cytokeratin (CK) 7‐positive immunoprofile. Methods and results We identified 28 such tumours from four large renal tumour archives. We performed immunohistochemistry for: CK7, CD117, PAX8, CD10, AMACR, e‐cadherin, CK20, CA9, AE1/AE3, vimentin, BerEP4, MOC31, CK5/6, p63, HMB45, melan A, CD15 and FH. In 14 cases we performed array CGH, with a successful result in nine cases. Median patient age was 66 years (range 49–78 years) with a male‐to‐female ratio of 1:1.8. Median tumour size was 3 cm (range 1.1–13.5 cm). All were single tumours, solid and tan‐brown, without a syndromic association. On microscopy, all cases showed solid and compact nested growth. There were frequent areas of oedematous stroma with loosely arranged cells. The tumour cells had oncocytic cytoplasm with uniformly round to oval nuclei, but without significant irregularities, and showed only focal perinuclear halos. Negative CD117 and positive CK7 reactivity were present in all cases (in two cases there was focal and very weak CD117 reactivity). Uniform reactivity was found for PAX8, AE1/AE3, e‐cadherin, BerEP4 and MOC31. Negative stains included CA9, CK20, vimentin, CK5/6, p63, HMB45, Melan A and CD15. CD10 and AMACR were either negative or focally positive; FH was retained. On array CGH, there were frequent deletions at 19p13.3 (seven of nine), 1p36.33 (five of nine) and 19q13.11 (four of nine); disomic status was found in two of nine cases. On follow‐up (mean 31.8 months, range 1–118), all patients were alive with no disease progression. Conclusion Low‐grade oncocytic tumours that are CD117‐negative/CK7‐positive demonstrate consistent and readily recognisable morphology, immunoprofile and indolent behaviour.