The Role of Genetic Analysis in Correct Diagnosis of Eosinophilic Variant of Chromophobe Renal Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND/AIM

It has been suggested that eosinophilic variant of chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (chRCC) with low chromosome number or lack of genomic alteration has an excellent prognosis in comparison to classic chRCC. The aim of our study was to analyse the phenotypical variations of 77 chRCCs, including 7 eosinophilic ones, each diagnosed unequivocally by genetic means.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

DNA isolated from chRCCs was subjected to array comparative genomic hybridisation (CGH) for establishing the chromosome alteration. Original histological slides were evaluated for cellular phenotype and growth pattern and compared to the genetic alterations.

RESULTS

Loss of the entire chromosome 1, 2, 6, 10, 13, 17 and 21 occurred in 95%, 94%, 86% 90% 82% 90% and 66% of the cases, respectively. The number of chromosome alterations in eosinophilic forms of chRCC corresponded to those found in classic chRCC with pale-reticular cytoplasm or mixed cellular characteristics. Three of seven eosinophilic variants with loss of 4, 10 and 11 chromosomes showed metastasis at the time of diagnosis whereas only 3 metastatic tumors were noticed among the 70 classic chRCC. We did not find discriminating difference in number of chromosome alteration between classic and eosinophilic forms of chRCC.

CONCLUSION

Eosinophilic chRCC has a more aggressive biology than the classic form. To avoid diagnostic pitfall of eosinophilic renal cell tumors with uncertain diagnosis, a genetic analysis should be carried out.

Copy number variants in association with type 1 collagenopathy: Atypical osteogenesis imperfecta

We report a sibling-pair and a 4-year old child from two families with an atypical presentation in Osteogenesis imperfecta (OI). In the sib-pair, the older sibling initially came to medical attention due to a fracture history (Patient 1) and she was shown to have a COL1A2 mutation. In addition, she also had developmental delay, facial dysmorphism, and a history of frequent infections which led to a search for an alternate diagnosis. ArrayCGH revealed a 4.3 Mb duplication on chromosome 19q13.42q13.43, which was confirmed by FISH analysis. On further familial analysis, the younger sibling who had no previous fracture history was also found to have the COL1A2 mutation and tested positive for the 19q13.42q13.43 duplication (Patient 2). The 19q13 duplication appears to be the cause of intellectual disability in these siblings but given that this is a chromosomal duplication, it is still possible that there is an as yet unidentified cause that may account for the combined phenotype in this family. Patient 3 was a 4-year old child presenting with a femoral fracture, blue sclerae, developmental delay, and joint hypermobility. Genetic analyses confirmed a COL1A2 mutation but also revealed an 8.8 Mb deletion of 11q24.2q25, confirmed by G-band chromosome analysis. We discuss the differing phenotypes in patients presenting with atypical OI and stress the need to consider ancillary investigations in individuals presenting with heterogeneous phenotypic symptoms, not entirely attributable to OI.

An aCGH classifier derived from BRCA1-mutated breast cancer and benefit of high-dose platinum-based chemotherapy in HER2-negative breast cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer cells deficient for BRCA1 are hypersensitive to agents inducing DNA double-strand breaks (DSB), such as bifunctional alkylators and platinum agents. Earlier, we had developed a comparative genomic hybridisation (CGH) classifier based on BRCA1-mutated breast cancers. We hypothesised that this BRCA1-like(CGH) classifier could also detect loss of function of BRCA1 due to other causes besides mutations and, consequently, might predict sensitivity to DSB-inducing agents.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We evaluated this classifier in stage III breast cancer patients, who had been randomly assigned between adjuvant high-dose platinum-based (HD-PB) chemotherapy, a DSB-inducing regimen, and conventional anthracycline-based chemotherapy. Additionally, we assessed BRCA1 loss through mutation or promoter methylation and immunohistochemical basal-like status in the triple-negative subgroup (TN subgroup).

RESULTS

We observed greater benefit from HD-PB chemotherapy versus conventional chemotherapy among patients with BRCA1-like(CGH) tumours [41/230 = 18%, multivariate hazard ratio (HR) = 0.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04-0.43] compared with patients with non-BRCA1-like(CGH) tumours (189/230 = 82%, HR = 0.78, 95% CI 0.50-1.20), with a significant difference (test for interaction P = 0.006). Similar results were obtained for overall survival (P interaction = 0.04) and when analyses were restricted to the TN subgroup. Sixty-three percent (20/32) of assessable BRCA1-like(CGH) tumours harboured either a BRCA1 mutation (n = 8) or BRCA1 methylation (n = 12).

CONCLUSION

BRCA1 loss as assessed by CGH analysis can identify patients with substantially improved outcome after adjuvant DSB-inducing chemotherapy when compared with standard anthracycline-based chemotherapy in our series.