Ballester Leomar Y, Huse Jason T, Tang Guilin, Fuller Gregory N
Department of Pathology and Genomic Medicine, Houston Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX 77030; Department of Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030.
Department of Pathology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030.
Hum Pathol. 2017 Nov;69:15-22. doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2017.05.005. Epub 2017 May 23.
Until recently, the diagnosis of brain tumors was primarily based on microscopic examination of hematoxylin and eosin-stained tissue sections. The updated World Health Organization (WHO) Classification of Tumours of the Central Nervous System incorporates genetic alterations into the classification system, with the goal of creating more homogenous disease categories with greater prognostic value. Hence, under the new classification system, the diagnosis of diffuse gliomas incorporates the evaluation of mutations in the IDH1 and IDH2 genes and simultaneous deletion of chromosomes 1p and 19q. For example, although under the 2007 WHO classification system, oligodendrogliomas could be diagnosed based solely on the presence of characteristic histologic features, the newly molecularly defined entity of "oligodendroglioma, IDH-mutant and 1p/19q codeleted" requires the presence of both an IDH1 or IDH2 mutation and 1p/19q codeletion. Given that diagnosis requires evaluation of critical genetic alterations, molecular diagnostics is becoming an increasingly important aspect of clinical oncologic neuropathology practice. As molecular testing is applied more frequently to the diagnosis of brain tumors, inconsistent or conflicting molecular information will create diagnostic challenges. Here we present 6 cases of diffuse glioma that presented a diagnostic challenge due to conflicting molecular testing results. These cases exemplify some of the potential complications that arise when introducing the new 2016 central nervous system WHO classification system diagnostic criteria into routine clinical practice. We aim to alert the general practice pathology community to these potential conflicts to help mitigate the risk of potential misdiagnosis.
直到最近,脑肿瘤的诊断主要基于苏木精和伊红染色组织切片的显微镜检查。世界卫生组织(WHO)更新的中枢神经系统肿瘤分类将基因改变纳入分类系统,目的是创建更具同质性且具有更大预后价值的疾病类别。因此,在新的分类系统下,弥漫性胶质瘤的诊断纳入了对异柠檬酸脱氢酶1(IDH1)和异柠檬酸脱氢酶2(IDH2)基因突变以及染色体1p和19q同时缺失的评估。例如,尽管在2007年WHO分类系统下,少突胶质细胞瘤仅根据特征性组织学特征的存在即可诊断,但新的分子定义实体“IDH突变型和1p/19q共缺失型少突胶质细胞瘤”需要同时存在IDH1或IDH2突变以及1p/19q共缺失。鉴于诊断需要评估关键的基因改变,分子诊断正成为临床肿瘤神经病理学实践中日益重要的一个方面。随着分子检测越来越频繁地应用于脑肿瘤的诊断,不一致或相互矛盾的分子信息将带来诊断挑战。在此,我们报告6例弥漫性胶质瘤病例,这些病例因分子检测结果相互矛盾而带来诊断挑战。这些病例例证了将2016年WHO中枢神经系统新分类系统诊断标准引入常规临床实践时可能出现的一些潜在并发症。我们旨在提醒普通病理学界注意这些潜在冲突,以帮助降低潜在误诊的风险。