Papillary Renal Cell Carcinoma With Microcystic Architecture Is Strongly Associated With Extrarenal Invasion and Metastatic Disease
Authors: Chan Emily , Stohr Bradley A. , Butler Robert S. , Cox Roni M. , Myles Jonathan L. , Nguyen Jane K. , Przybycin Christopher G. , Reynolds Jordan P. , Williamson Sean R. , McKenney Jesse K. 
Published: September 2021

Papillary renal cell carcinoma (PRCC) is well-recognized as a morphologically and molecularly heterogenous group of kidney tumors with variable clinical behavior. Our goal was to analyze a unique histologic pattern of PRCC we have observed in routine practice to evaluate for potential clinical significance or distinct molecular signature. We identified 42 cases of PRCC showing a morphologically distinct architecture characterized by numerous epithelial-lined cysts containing the papillary tumor (herein called “microcysts”), which are typically separated by fibrous stroma. Of the initial 42 case test set with microcystic features, 23 (55%) were stage pT3a or higher. Most tumors had strong and diffuse cytoplasmic immunoreactivity for CK7 (93%, 37/40) and AMACR (100%, 40/40). Fumarate hydratase staining was retained in all cases tested (39/39). We performed next-generation sequencing on 15 of these cases with available tissue and identified chromosomal alterations commonly reported in historically “type 1” PRCC, notably multiple chromosomal gains, particularly of chromosomes 7 and 17, and MET alterations. However, alterations in pathways associated with more aggressive behavior (including SETD2, CDKN2A, and members of the NRF pathway) were also identified in 6 of 15 cases tested (40%). Given this molecular and immunophenotypic data, we subsequently reviewed an additional group of 60 consecutive pT2b-pT3 PRCCs to allow for comparisons between cases with and without microcysts, to assess for potential associations with other recently described histologic patterns (ie, “unfavorable architecture”: micropapillary, solid, and hobnail), and to assess interobserver reproducibility for diagnosing architectural patterns and grade. Of the total combined 102 PRCCs, 67 (66%) had microcystic architecture within the intrarenal component but were commonly admixed with other patterns (39% had micropapillary, 31% solid, and 31% hobnail). Twenty-seven cases (26%) had metastatic disease, and 24 of these 27 (89%) had microcystic architecture in the intrarenal tumor. Within the pT3 subset, 21 of 22 cases with metastases (95%) had extrarenal invasion as either individual microcysts in renal sinus fat or aggregates of microcysts bulging beyond the confines of the capsule. Backward elimination and stepwise regression methods to detect features significantly associated with adverse outcome identified solid architecture (hazard ratio [HR]: 6.3; confidence interval [CI]: 2.1-18.8; P=0.001), hobnail architecture (HR: 5.3; CI: 1.7-16.7; P=0.004), and microcystic architecture at the tumor-stromal interface (HR: 4.2; CI: 1.1-16.7; P=0.036) as strongest. Of architectural patterns and grade, the microcystic pattern had a substantial interobserver agreement (κ score=0.795) that was highest among the 6 observers. In summary, PRCCs with microcystic architecture represents a subset of historically “type 1” PRCC with a predilection for morphologically distinctive extrarenal involvement and metastatic disease. Microcysts co-vary with other “unfavorable” architectural patterns also associated with higher risk for aggressive disease (ie, micropapillary, hobnail, and solid), but microcysts were more common and have superior interobserver reproducibility. These findings suggest that microcystic PRCC should be recognized as a potentially aggressive histologic pattern of growth in PRCC.