Background There are no established guidelines for pathologic diagnosis/reporting of IPMNs. Design An international multidisciplinary group brought together by the Verona Pancreas Group in Italy-2013, was tasked to devise recommendations. Results 1) Crucial to rule out invasive carcinoma with extensive (if not complete) sampling. 2) Invasive component is to be documented in a full synoptic report including its size, type, grade, stage. 3) The term “minimally invasive” should be avoided; instead, invasion size with stage and substaging of T1 (1a, b, c; ≤0.5, >0.5–≤1, >1 cm), is to be documented. 4) Largest diameter of the invasion, not the distance from the nearest duct, is to be used. 5) A category of “indeterminate/(suspicious) for invasion” is acceptable for rare cases. 6) The term “malignant” IPMN should be avoided. 7) The highest grade of dysplasia in the non-invasive component is to be documented separately. 8) Lesion size is to be correlated with imaging findings in cysts with rupture. 9) The main duct diameter, and if possible, its involvement is to be documented; however, it is not required to provide main vs branch duct classification in the resected tumor. 10) Subtyping as gastric/intestinal/pancreatobiliary/oncocytic/mixed is of value. 11) Frozen section is to be performed highly selectively, with appreciation of its shortcomings. 12) These principles also apply to other similar tumoral intraepithelial neoplasms (mucinous cystic neoplasms, intra-ampullary, intra-biliary/cholecystic). Conclusion These recommendations will ensure proper communication of salient tumor characteristics to the management teams, accurate comparison of data between analyses, and development of more effective management algorithms.

Ki67 index is now an essential part of classification of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. However, its adaptation into daily practice has been fraught with challenges related to counting methodology. In this study, three reviewers used four counting methodologies to calculate Ki67 index in 68 well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: (1) ‘eye-ball’ estimation, which has been advocated as reliable and is widely used; (2) automated counting by image analyzer; (3) manual eye-counting (eye under a microscope without a grid); and (4) manual count of camera-captured/printed image. Pearson’s correlation (R) was used to measure pair-wise correlation among three reviewers using all four methodologies. Average level of agreement was calculated using mean of R values. The results showed that: (1) ‘eye-balling’ was least expensive and fastest (average time <1 min) but had poor reliability and reproducibility. (2) Automated count was the most expensive and least practical with major impact on turnaround time (limited by machine and personnel accessibility), and, more importantly, had inaccuracies in overcounting unwanted material. (3) Manual eye count had no additional cost, averaged 6 min, but proved impractical and poorly reproducible. (4) Camera-captured/printed image was most reliable, had highest reproducibility, but took longer than ‘eye-balling’. In conclusion, based on its comparatively low cost/benefit ratio and reproducibility, camera-captured/printed image appears to be the most practical for calculating Ki67 index. Although automated counting is generally advertised as the gold standard for index calculation, in this study it was not as accurate or cost-effective as camera-captured/printed image and was highly operator-dependent. ‘Eye-balling’ produces highly inaccurate and unreliable results, and is not recommended for routine use.

No abstract

Prognostication of invasive ampullary adenocarcinomas (AACs) and their stratification into appropriate management categories have been highly challenging owing to a lack of well-established predictive parameters. In colorectal cancers, recent studies have shown that tumor budding confers a worse prognosis and correlates significantly with nodal metastasis and recurrence; however, this has not been evaluated in AAC. To investigate the prevalence, significance, and clinical correlations of tumor budding in AAC, 244 surgically resected, stringently defined, invasive AAC were analyzed for tumor budding—defined as the presence of more than or equal to 5 isolated single cancer cells or clusters composed of fewer than 5 cancer cells per field measuring 0.785 mm2 using a 20 × objective lens in the stroma of the invasive front. The extent of the budding was then further classified as “high” if there were greater than or equal to 3 budding foci and as “low” if there were <3 budding foci or no budding focus. One hundred ninety-four AACs (80%) were found to be high-budding and 50 (20%) were low-budding. When the clinicopathologic features and survival of the 2 groups were compared, the AACs with high-budding had larger invasion size (19 mm vs. 13 mm; P<0.001), an unrecognizable/absent pre-invasive component (57% vs. 82%; P<0.005), infiltrative growth (51% vs. 2%; P<0.001), nonintestinal-type histology (72% vs. 46%; P<0.001), worse differentiation (58% vs. 10%; P<0.001), more lymphatic (74% vs. 10%; P<0.001), and perineural invasion (28% vs. 2%; P<0.001); more lymph node metastasis (44% vs. 17%; P<0.001), higher T-stage (T3 and T4) (42% vs. 10%; P<0.001), and more aggressive behavior (mean survival: 50 mo vs. 32 mo; 3-year and 5-year survival rates: 93% vs. 41% and 68% vs. 24%, respectively; P<0.001). Furthermore, using a multivariable Cox regression model, tumor budding was found to be an independent predictor of survival (P = 0.01), which impacts prognosis (hazard ratio: 2.6) even more than T-stage and lymph node metastasis (hazard ratio: 1.9 and 1.8, respectively). In conclusion, tumor budding is frequently encountered in AAC. High-budding is a strong independent predictor of overall survival, with a prognostic correlation stronger than the 2 established parameters: T-stage and lymph node metastasis. Therefore, budding should be incorporated into surgical pathology reports for AAC.

Ampullary (AMP) carcinomas comprise a heterogeneous group of cancers lacking adequate subcategorization. In the present study, 249 strictly defined primary AMP carcinomas (ACs) identified in 1469 malignant pancreatoduodenectomy specimens were analyzed for defining features. Gross and microscopic findings were used to determine tumor epicenter and extent of preinvasive component. ACs were classified into 4 distinct subtypes based on location: (1) Intra-AMP (25%): Invasive carcinomas arising in intra-ampullary papillary-tubular neoplasms with zero to minimal, duodenal surface involvement (<25% of the tumor). These tumors were more commonly found in men, they had a relatively large overall size (mean, 2.9 cm) but had smaller invasive component (mean, 1.5 cm), and were predominantly of a lower TNM stage (85%, T1/2; and 72% N0). They carried the best prognosis among the 4 groups (3-y survival, 73%). (2) AMP-ductal (15%): These were tumors forming constrictive, sclerotic, plaque-like thickening of the walls of the common bile duct and/or pancreatic duct resulting in mucosa-covered, button-like elevations of the papilla into the duodenal lumen. There was no significant exophytic (preinvasive) growth. These were the smallest tumors (mean overall size, 1.9 cm; mean invasion size 1.7 cm), but carried the worst prognosis (3-y survival, 41%), presumably due to the pancreatobiliary histology/origin (in 86%); however, even this group had significantly better prognosis when compared with 113 ordinary pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (3 y, 11%; P<0.0001). (3) Peri-AMP-duodenal (5%): Massive exophytic, ulcero-fungating tumors growing into the duodenal lumen and eccentrically encasing the ampullary orifice with only minimal intra-ampullary luminal involvement. These were mostly of intestinal phenotype (75%) and some had mucinous features. Although these tumors were the largest (mean overall size 4.7 cm; and mean invasion size 3.4 cm), and had the highest incidence of lymph node metastasis (50%), they carried an intermediate prognosis (3-y survival, 69%) to that seen among a group of 55 nonampullary duodenal carcinoma controls. (4) AC-not otherwise specified ("papilla of Vater"; 55%): Ulcero-nodular tumors located at the papilla of Vater, which do not show the specific characteristics identified among the other 3 subtypes. In conclusion, ACs comprise 4 clinicopathologic subtypes that are prognostically distinct.