Evolution of Classification of Thymic Epithelial Tumors in the Era of Dr Thomas V. Colby.
Thymic epithelial tumors can be classified according to their histopathologic features or staged based on the presence and extent of invasion, implants, lymph node involvement, and/or distant metastases. At least 24 histomorphologic classifications and 14 staging systems have been proposed within the last century (Table 1).
CHALLENGES OF THE CLASSIFICATION OF THYMIC EPITHELIAL TUMORS
The classification of TET has been challenging because of (1) the presence of various combinations of epithelial cells and lymphocytes that compose these tumors; (2) the paucity of these neoplasms, making large studies difficult; (3) an uncertainty about the neoplastic component(s) of TET (thymic epithelial cells and/or lymphocytes) in early classifications; (4) controversies about the prognostic significance of classifications and the malignant potential of thymomas; and (5) the diversity of thymic-derived tumors (ie, TETs, lymphomas, germ cell tumors). Many pathologists have struggled with the classification of TET. For instance, Ewing (7) noted in 1916 that "no group of tumors has more successfully resisted attempts at interpretation and classification than those of the thymus." Lowenhaupt (8) stated in 1948 that "thymic tumors, because of their rarity and diversity, have long resisted attempts to reach valid conclusions from [the] variously described and variously interpreted material available from the literature." In 1961, Bernatz et al (9) began their article on classification of thymoma with the remarks that "a study of thymic tumors must enjoy a prominent but unenviable position in any list of frustrating experiences inherent in the pursuit of medical knowledge" and that "remarkable as is this dissidence all reports overwhelmingly agree that there is much confusion as well as controversy about this group of tumors."
In the early years of histomorphologic classification of TETs, it was not clear whether the epithelial cells and/or the lymphocytes were the neoplastic component. In 1917, Bell (10) noted, in a case report of a thymoma, that the tumor was "likely of epithelial origin." Ewing (11) mentioned in 1928 that "the chief source of [lymphosarcoma or thymoma] is probably the reticulum cell, but lymphocytes are often present in abundance." Although it was still debated, in 1948, Lowenhaupt (8) remarked on "the epithelial derivation of this entire group of neoplasms," seeming to conclude that the epithelial cells were the neoplastic cells. In 1972, Zeiller and Dolan12 showed in experiments in mice and rats that thymocytes are not derived from the thymus but rather originate from the bone marrow and migrate to the thymus. These findings suggested that although they are present in close vicinity in the same organ, the embryologic origin of thymic epithelial cells differs from that of thymocytes. Rosai and Levine (13) concluded in 1976 that a simultaneous neoplastic transformation of 2 cellular components, epithelial and lymphocytic, of different embryogenesis within the same organ would be unlikely. Rather, they suggested that the epithelial cells were the neoplastic cells of thymomas because (1) the epithelial cells have morphologic and biologic properties of neoplastic cells, (2) the epithelial cells are present in the invasive tumor and metastases, (3) some thymomas are only composed of epithelial cells, and (4) "in cytologically malignant thymomas the anaplastic features are restricted to [the epithelial cells]." The authors considered the lymphocytes of thymomas to be benign because (1) it had been shown that thymic lymphocytes are derived from the bone marrow, (2) light microscopic and ultrastructural features of lymphocytes in thymoma are not different from those of normal "resting" or stimulated lymphocytes, and (3) the lymphocytes lack biologic properties of neoplastic cells. Today the neoplastic nature of the epithelial cells and the benign/reactive properties of lymphocytes in TET have been well accepted.
EVOLUTION OF THE HISTOMORPHOLOGIC CLASSIFICATION OF THYMIC EPITHELIAL TUMORS
At least 24 histomorphologic classifications of TET have been proposed during the last century (Table 1). Eighty-eight years ago, in 1928, Ewing (11) categorized thymic tumors into 2 main groups, the "lymphosarcoma or thymoma" and the "carcinoma" (Table 2). A third category, "spindle-cell or myxosarcoma," comprised rare tumors that were thought to derive from the stroma. Although Ewing still questioned the cell of origin of the "lymphosarcoma or thymoma," he concluded from his own case studies that the reticulum [epithelial] cells are the main or sole source of the tumor and the lymphocytes are largely passive but "are often present in abundance." In 1948, Lowenhaupt (8) classified thymic tumors according to the stage of embryonic development of the normal thymus (Table 2). Although this classification was not used in subsequent classifications, Lowenhaupt8 introduced some fundamental thoughts that were later confirmed in other studies, such as that TETs are of epithelial origin and that "early surgical excision, if possible, is the treatment of choice." In 1955, Castleman (14) defined thymomas as tumors composed of lymphocytes and epithelial cells. Castleman did not divide thymomas into subtypes because he argued that "there are so many variations within a given tumor that there are no foolproof criteria differentiating the thymoma in a patient with myasthenia gravis from one without myasthenia gravis, and that there are no microscopic differences between the thymoma that is limited to the thymic gland and the one that extends beyond its confines...." He was not entirely convinced that thymomas are malignant, even though he described that in a quarter of thymomas the tumor replaces the entire thymic gland and invades into and through the pleura, pericardium, nerves, and/or blood vessels. In addition, he described the discrete nodules in the pleura and pericardium that are not connected with the primary tumor as implants rather than true metastases. However, although Castleman acknowledged lymph node metastases, he avoided terms such as malignant thymoma or carcinoma of the thymic gland because (1) he did not observe any thymomas with "embolic metastases" and (2) he noted that encapsulated thymomas were morphologically similar to thymomas that spread within the mediastinum. In his opinion, tumors that were previously classified as "malignant thymoma" with metastases to distant organs did not have typical morphologic features of thymomas but were usually lymphomas, teratomas, or primary tumors of the lung, pancreas, or stomach that presented with large metastases to mediastinal lymph nodes. Moreover, he suggested that although tumors with implants and/or extension, invasion, or penetration of neighboring structures might be considered malignant, surgical removal of these tumors before implants have occurred or before the tumor extended within the mediastinum might have cured the patients. Recurrences, he felt, occurred likely because of incomplete resection.
In 1961, "with the hope that some prognostic significance could be gained through study of cell types," Bernatz et al (9) classified thymomas based on the predominant cell type (Table 2). Bernatz et al (9) reported on 138 patients who underwent surgery for thymoma at the Mayo Clinic Rochester. Based on the proposed morphologic classification, they found that patients with predominant lymphocytic or spindle cell thymomas have a better prognosis than patients with mixed cell type or predominant epithelial cell thymoma. Furthermore, predominant lymphocytic or spindle cell thymomas were more often encapsulated than thymomas with other predominant cell types. Moreover, based on the data from this study, Bernatz et al (9) concluded that lack of invasion is of more prognostic significance than cell type, although statistical analysis was not performed at that time. They realized, however, that the classification of thymomas would likely need to be further developed and concluded their article with the words from Effler and McCormack (15) "that the intriguing subject of thymic neoplasms still requires new thought and clarification." The study by Bernatz et al (9) also showed the previously disputed benefit of thymectomy for at least some patients with myasthenia gravis. Eighteen of 64 patients (28.1%) with thymoma in the setting of myasthenia gravis who underwent thymectomy were well either without (n = 11) or with (n = 7) medication after a mean follow-up of 8 years. In a subsequent study, Bernatz et al (16) applied statistical analysis to outcome data of 80 patients with thymoma and myasthenia gravis (64 of which were also included in the original study of Bernatz et al (9) from 1961). The authors confirmed that myasthenia gravis did not affect survival of invasive thymomas. However, in noninvasive thymomas the survival of patients with myasthenia gravis was worse than for patients without that disease. Wilkins and Castleman (17) in 1979 did not find myasthenia gravis to be an adverse prognostic factor (anymore), possibly because of improved treatment. This was also confirmed in 1981 by Masaoka et al, (18) who showed that the 5-year survival of patients with thymoma and myasthenia gravis was similar to patients with thymoma without myasthenia gravis. However, the 10-year survival of patients with myasthenia gravis was worse in that study, which might have been because many deaths due to myasthenia gravis occurred during the early years of the study and, therefore, influenced the 10-year survival. A recent analysis of the retrospective Japanese database of TETs that included 598 TETs in patients with myasthenia gravis did not reveal any difference in 5- and 10-year overall or recurrence-free survival. (19) A recent multicenter study from Italy including 375 patients with thymoma showed a slight protective effect of the presence of myasthenia gravis on overall survival, although that was not confirmed in multivariate analysis. (20) These findings suggest that today the outcome of patients with thymoma and myasthenia gravis is at least as good as the outcome of patients with thymoma without myasthenia gravis.
In 1976, Rosai and Levine (13) defined thymoma simply as an epithelial tumor originating from the thymic gland. The authors proposed to restrict the designation of thymoma to neoplasms of thymic epithelial cells regardless of the proportion of accompanying lymphocytes. The authors suggested that terms such as seminomatous thymoma, round cell thymoma, or granulomatous thymoma should not be used anymore; these tumors should be designated according to the cell of origin, that is, germinoma (seminoma) of thymus, thymic carcinoid, or Hodgkin disease, respectively. Rosai and Levine supported their belief that "once the term thymoma is restricted to the tumor of epithelial thymic cells, with or without a lymphocytic component, all further subdivisions are artificial" based on the review of 164 cases of thymoma. In a subsequent review, Levine and Rosai (21) added a component of thymic carcinoma to the classification (Table 2).
Subsequently, TETs were classified in more detail and classifications focused on the relationship between neoplastic cells and their possible origin from the cortex and/or medulla of the benign thymic gland. Evidence had shown that in the benign thymic gland medullary epithelial cells are distinct from cortical epithelial cells based on morphology, ultrastructure, and immunology and therefore provide different microenvironments. (22) Furthermore, it was suggested that differences in nuclear and cytoplasmic features allowed the distinction between medullary and cortical thymic epithelial cells by microscopy (Table 3; Figure 1, A and B). Therefore, a classification into medullary predominant, cortical predominant, and mixed cell types was appealing. In 1985, Marino and Mueller-Hermelink (22) first proposed a classification of TET based on the compartment of the normal thymic gland from which the neoplastic epithelial cells likely arose (Table 2). In addition, thymic carcinomas were defined by the presence of invasive growth and almost pure composition of epithelial cells with cytologic criteria of malignancy. They applied this classification to a series of 58 thymomas and 13 thymic carcinomas and found that cortical thymomas had a tendency to occur in younger patients than other thymomas. (22) Furthermore, myasthenia gravis was only identified in patients with cortical thymoma. The more aggressive nature of cortical thymomas was reflected by their tendency for invasive growth and their clinical behavior, with 14 of 25 cases (56%) being locally invasive and/or having intrathoracic (13; 52%) or extrathoracic (1; 4%) metastases. A single case recurred. In addition, the authors noted differences in the lymphoid component, with medium- and large-sized lymphocytes more commonly seen in pure or predominantly cortical thymoma whereas small pleomorphic lymphocytes were mostly seen in medullary or mixed thymoma with medullary predominance. Moreover, the number of lymphocytes was high in cortical and mixed thymomas, whereas pure medullary thymomas had only rare lymphocytes. The concept by Marino and Muller-Hermelink (22) of classifying TET according to the structural components of the normal thymus was further developed by Kirchner et al (23) in 1989 based on a study of 95 TETs, patient's outcome, and proliferation assays of 12 TETs (Table 2). Kirchner et al (23) introduced a category of well-differentiated thymic carcinoma, defined as TET with incomplete loss of organotypic differentiation, tightly packed epithelial cells with slight to moderate atypia, and some immature CD1-positive T cells. Small areas of cortical differentiation could be present in well-differentiated thymic carcinoma. In contrast to well-differentiated thymic carcinoma, other thymic carcinomas were defined by lack of organotypic features. Based on outcome studies, Kirchner et al (23) considered medullary and mixed thymomas as benign; predominantly cortical thymomas, cortical thymomas, and well-differentiated thymic carcinomas as low-grade malignant tumors with increasing invasiveness and metastatic capacity; and thymic carcinoma as overtly malignant tumors. In vitro studies confirmed that the proliferative rate of neoplastic epithelial cells correlates with the different tumor types and their growth behavior in vivo. For instance, cells from mixed thymomas (n = 3) did not grow in vitro or ceased to proliferate after less than 3 passages, whereas cells from well-differentiated thymic carcinomas (n = 3) had the highest growth rate among the TETs tested, could be passaged for a maximum of 35 times, and were kept in culture for up to 8 months. The proliferative rate of epithelial cells of cortical (n = 3) and predominantly cortical thymomas (n = 3) was between that of mixed thymomas and well-differentiated thymic carcinomas.
In 1999, Suster and Moran (24,25) proposed a 3-tiered classification that was based upon morphologic features of differentiation (Table 2). This classification subtyped TETs according to their degree of cytologic atypia, presence of organotypic features of thymic differentiation, and "closeness to benign thymus." Organotypic features of differentiation were defined as features that "most closely resemble the normal appearance of the thymus in its mature or involuted state" and are summarized in Table 4. Areas of medullary differentiation were described as well-circumscribed foci containing plump epithelial cells with scant lymphocytes within an otherwise cortical-appearing neoplastic population of cells, with or without Hassall corpuscles. According to this classification, thymomas exhibit all or most organotypic features, thymic carcinomas do not have any or have only minimal organotypic features, and atypical thymomas show intermediate morphologic features. The classification is illustrated in Figure 2, A through D. In addition, the authors considered all thymomas to potentially be malignant.
In 1989, a "WHO [World Health Organization] committee for the histologic classification of tumours of the thymus" was organized by Dr Juan Rosai. Subsequently, pathologists from 8 countries debated during 1 decade whether a histologic subclassification of thymomas is possible and useful. Although some pathologists favored a classification that just distinguished noninvasive from invasive thymomas, others thought that histologic types of thymoma correlated with their aggressiveness and clinical behavior and therefore further morphologic subclassification would be useful. Subsequently, a "compromised" histologic classification was published. (26) Because the association between thymoma subtype and compartment of normal thymic gland was still controversial, the terminology chosen by the WHO was "noncommittal" and was designated by letters and numbers (Table 2). All thymomas composed of bland-appearing spindle and/or oval cells were classified as type A; thymomas that contained dendritic or plump ("epithelioid") cells were categorized as type B. Type B thymomas were further subdivided based on the proportional increase in tumor cells in relation to thymocytes, increasing cytologic atypia, and presence or absence of medullary differentiation. Figure 3, A through F, illustrates the morphologic features of the WHO classification. In addition to these " classic" thymomas, uncommon thymomas were described, including micronodular thymoma (Figure 4, A), microscopic thymoma (Figure 4, B), and metaplastic thymoma (Figure 4, C and D). Thymic neuroendocrine tumors were defined identically to neuroendocrine tumors in the lung, including typical carcinoid tumor, atypical carcinoid tumor (defined as 2-10 mitoses per 10 high-power fields and/or necrosis), large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma, and small cell carcinoma. The 1999 WHO classification (26) emphasized that the classification of cytoarchitectural features of thymoma should occur independent of staging because the classification "based on invasive/metastasizing properties of the tumour relates more closely to recurrence and outcome than the one based on cytoarchitectural features." The WHO classification was revised in 2004 to include descriptions of clinical symptoms, macroscopic findings, immunohistochemical characteristics, genetic features, and prognostic data. (27) Type C thymoma (1999 WHO classification (26)) was now defined as thymic carcinoma; the morphologic subtypes of thymomas remained unchanged. The most recent WHO classification, (28) published in 2015, advocated a similar histomorphologic classification that had retained the designation of the tumors by letters and numbers. The 2015 WHO classification used an interdisciplinary approach to the diagnosis of TET and included contributions from radiologists, thoracic surgeons, and oncologists. Epidemiologic and prognostic data for the WHO classification were derived, in part, from the worldwide retrospective database of the International Thymic Malignancy Interest Group (ITMIG), which comprises more than 6000 cases. Findings on imaging studies, specifically computer tomography/positron emission tomography and cytologic features, were also included. Some histomorphologic features and immunohistochemical criteria were refined in an attempt to enhance the reproducibility of subtyping of thymomas and to facilitate the distinction between thymomas and thymic carcinomas. (29) For instance, to help with the distinction between type B1 and B2 thymoma, the definition of type B1 thymomas included features such as thymuslike architecture and cytology, abundance of immature T cells, areas of medullary differentiation (medullary islands), and paucity of polygonal or dendritic epithelial cells without clustering (<3 contiguous epithelial cells) (Figure 5, A and B). Hassall corpuscles or perivascular spaces were considered optional. In addition, the distinction between type A and type AB thymomas was discussed in more detail. Although both types contain bland-appearing spindle/oval cells, they should be distinguished from each other by a low ("easily countable," type A) or high (TdT-positive, "T-cells impossible to count," and/or "moderate infiltrate of TdT+ lymphocytes [difficult to count] in > 10% of the tumour areas," type AB) content of lymphocytes. Furthermore, an atypical type A thymoma variant was introduced. This TET is characterized by features of conventional type A thymoma with bland-appearing spindle/oval cells and atypical findings including hypercellularity, increased mitotic activity, and focal necrosis. This variant was included in the WHO classification because studies have shown an association between necrosis in type A thymomas and recurrence and extrathoracic metastasis. (30) Moreover, in a study of type A and AB thymomas, necrosis was associated with stage in univariate and multivariate analysis. (31) However, neither study showed an association between mitotic activity and stage or outcome in type A (30) or type A and AB thymomas. (31) The 2015 WHO classification recommended reporting of all thymoma subtypes in 10% increments (except type AB thymomas) if more than one subtype is identified in a resection specimen. Furthermore, all subtypes of thymoma were considered malignant because they can show an aggressive behavior. Exceptions were micronodular and microscopic thymoma, in which no fatal outcome has been reported. It was also suggested that immunohistochemistry might be used for the diagnosis and subtyping of thymomas with ambiguous histology. Thymic carcinoma subtypes have been broadened and now include the NUT carcinoma (Table 5).
EVOLUTION OF THE STAGING CLASSIFICATION OF THYMIC EPITHELIAL TUMORS
Staging classifications of TET in general are based upon invasion, implants, lymph node involvement, and/or distant metastases. During the past half-century, at least 14 staging systems have been proposed, even though many of these were not outright designated as "staging systems" (Table 1). This review will focus on those that introduced new and interesting concepts of classification. In 1961, Bernatz et al (9) divided thymomas into noninvasive and invasive thymomas (Table 6).9 This categorization was based on their study that showed that only 6 of 27 patients (22.2%) with invasive thymoma lived 5 or more years following surgery, in contrast to 49 of 64 patients (76.5%) with noninvasive thymoma, suggesting that patients with invasive thymoma had worse survival than patients with noninvasive thymoma. Similarly, in 1976, Rosai and Levine (13) suggested that thymomas need only be separated into encapsulated versus invasive tumors for predicting outcome and guiding therapy. Rosai and Levine found that well-encapsulated thymomas without myasthenia gravis remain stable and surgical excision is curative, even though the patient might develop a paraneoplastic syndrome or local recurrence, which can occur either as multiple pleural implants or as localized mediastinal tumor. In contrast, invasive thymomas, although histologically indistinguishable from encapsulated thymoma, have a worse outcome.
In 1978, Bergh et al (32) developed a 3-tiered staging system that further subclassified invasive thymomas (Table 6). When applied to 43 thymomas, that staging system revealed "considerable" differences in survival between stage II and III thymomas, supporting that the extent of invasion has prognostic value. Wilkins and Castleman (17) modified the classification by Bergh et al slightly in 1979, adding invasion into pleura and pericardium to stage II (Table 6). The authors confirmed that patients with invasive thymomas had an overall worse outcome than patients with noninvasive thymomas; however, the authors did not reach any conclusions in regards to outcome of patients with stage II versus stage III thymoma.
In 1981, Masaoka et al (18) pioneered todays most commonly used staging system for thymomas (Table 6). This system was developed for clinical staging of thymomas assuming that all thymomas have a variable degree of malignant potential and prognosis of thymoma is determined from its stage, which is based on invasiveness of the tumor through the capsule into surrounding tissue and organs and metastases. This classification was designed upon their observation that thymomas initially grow locally, subsequently infiltrate or disseminate, and finally metastasize. It was sought to guide therapy, to evaluate the results of surgery, and to define the prognosis of a patient. When this staging system was applied to 96 thymomas, they showed that survival differed based on stage, with 5-year survivals of 92.6% (stage I), 85.7% (stage II), 69.6% (stage III), and 50% (stage IV). In 1994, Koga et al (33) modified the Masaoka staging, changing invasion into the tumor capsule (Masaoka stage II/2) to microscopic invasion through the capsule (transcapsular; Koga stage IIA) to accommodate the most common point of view of pathologists that a tumor is invasive if it grows through the tumor capsule (Table 6). Therefore, thymomas invading into but not through the tumor capsule were now classified as stage I in the Koga staging system. It was confirmed later by Roden et al (4) that the prognosis is similar for patients with thymomas infiltrating into but not through the tumor capsule when compared with patients with encapsulated thymomas. Applying this system to 79 thymomas, Koga et al found that although the outcome did not differ significantly between stages I and II, there were significant differences between stages II and III and stages II and IV. The Koga staging system is now often referred to as the modified Masaoka or the Masaoka-Koga staging system. This staging system is probably worldwide the most commonly used staging system for thymomas today and is recommended by the WHO. (29)
In 1982, the French Groupe d'Etude des Tumeurs Thymiques proposed a clinical classification that encompassed not only extent of invasion and metastases but also completeness of resection (Table 6). (34,35)
In 1991, Yamakawa and colleagues (36) proposed a tentative tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) classification that was similar to the Masaoka staging system but distinguished between lymphogenous and hematogenous metastases (Table 6). Lymphogenous metastases occurred in a few patients and were thought to progress from anterior mediastinal lymph nodes to intrathoracic and later to extrathoracic lymph nodes. Hematogenous metastases did not reveal any particular characteristics. The T stage was adopted from the Masaoka classification. In contrast to TNM classifications of other organs, the T stage for TET did not consider size of the tumor because it was thought that the malignant potential of thymoma was due to its invasiveness and its tendency to disseminate rather than its size. The TNM classification was applied to 207 thymomas. When evaluating stage IVB cases (thymomas with lymphogenous and/or hematogenous metastases), no association between stage and prognosis or treatment was identified, possibly because of the small number of cases (8 of 207; 3.9%). The classification was also applied to 13 thymic carcinomas and 6 thymic carcinoid tumors. In this population, there was a much higher frequency of stage IVB cases, and the TNM classification was considered to be more useful in these tumors. Tsuchiya et al (37) thought that a pathologic TNM staging system would be applicable to thymic carcinomas and thymic carcinoid tumors but not to thymomas, as Yamakawa et al (36) had suggested, and proposed a modification to the TNM staging system in 1994 (Table 6). Stage pT2 now included thymic carcinomas with invasion through the tumor capsule; tumors that invaded through the pleura or the pericardium were classified as stage pT3. The staging groups were also modified. Tumors with N1 disease were now distributed into stages II to IV based upon the T stage because N1 disease was considered resectable and curable. The authors validated the modified TNM staging system on 16 thymic carcinomas. Although there were no stage II thymic carcinomas in this study, survival curves separated them between stages I and III or IV and stages III and IV; the differences were not statistically significant, likely again because of the small number of cases. Moreover, this study predominantly included squamous cell carcinomas and 2 undifferentiated and 1 basaloid carcinoma, and lacked other carcinoma types of high-grade histology such as small cell carcinoma, lymphoepithelioma-like carcinoma, sarcomatoid carcinoma, and clear cell carcinoma. Carcinoid tumors were also not evaluated.
In 1997, Suster and Moran (25) developed a simple 3-tiered staging classification that was proposed to be usable to stage both thymic carcinomas and thymomas (Table 7). Weissferdt and Moran (38) proposed a 3-tiered staging classification for thymic carcinomas in 2012 (Table 7) with the purpose of simplifying the existing TNM classification. This classification was developed based on outcome data of 33 patients with thymic carcinoma. At the same time, Moran et al (39) recommended a staging solely for thymomas (Table 7). The authors introduced a stage 0 or in situ malignancy, which most likely could be controlled by complete resection alone. Only invasive tumors were assigned a stage. However, the authors acknowledged that recurrence has been reported even in encapsulated thymomas. When the authors applied this staging system to 250 patients with thymoma, significant differences in overall and recurrence-free survival were identified when comparing stages 0 and I with stages II and III; no differences were found in outcome between stages 0 and I. Furthermore, there were no differences in outcome between stages IIa, b, and c. The authors considered, however, that distinction was still important because of possible differences in treatment. The prognostic significance of the proposed Moran staging for thymomas was later confirmed by Roden et al, (40) although in that study, patients with stage 0 disease had a significantly better overall survival than stage I patients.
Currently, neither the American Joint Committee on Cancer nor the Union for International Cancer Control provides a staging system for thymoma or thymic carcinoma. The modified Masaoka staging system (Masaoka-Koga staging system) appears to be the most commonly used staging system for thymomas, whereas the TNM staging as recommended by the WHO (Table 6) might be used for thymic carcinoma. (28,41) To facilitate staging, the 1999 and 2004 WHO included morphologic criteria to facilitate the evaluation of invasion and metastases (Table 8; Figure 6, A through F). (26,27)
There is a need for a staging system that can be applied to all TETs, including thymomas, thymic carcinomas, and thymic neuroendocrine tumors. (42) Therefore, the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) together with ITMIG proposed a staging system in 2014 for the forthcoming (eighth) edition of the TNM classification of malignant tumors (Table 7). (42) This classification requires microscopic evidence of findings for pathologic staging. This staging system was validated using a worldwide retrospective database led by ITMIG and supplemented by cases from the Japanese Association for Research on the Thymus and the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons that encompassed more than 10 000 TETs. This proposed TNM classification is different from previous staging classifications of TET in that encapsulated TET and TET invading into the surrounding connective tissue are both classified as T1a because data from the retrospective database did not identify differences in outcome between these tumors. Some aspects of the proposed staging were considered speculative and still need to be validated, such as the distinction between stages IIIa and IIIb, N1 and N2, and M1a and M1b. Overall, subset analysis showed that this staging proposal is applicable to thymomas and thymic carcinomas. The number of thymic neuroendocrine tumors was too low for statistically meaningful conclusions.
Although most studies showed that staging is an important prognostic parameter for TET, there are controversies with regard to significance of the individual elements of staging systems. Some studies did not find any significant differences in outcome between patients with encapsulated thymomas and patients with thymomas that invade into the thymic or perithymic adipose tissue. (33,42,43) In contrast, a recent study by Roden et al (40) showed significantly worse overall survival for patients with thymomas that invaded through the capsule versus encapsulated thymomas. This controversy might, at least in part, be due to interobserver variability. Therefore, Roden et al (40) studied the interobserver reproducibility of 3 different staging systems, including the modified Masaoka (Masaoka-Koga), proposed Moran, and proposed IASLC/ITMIG staging system. In that study, the agreement among 3 thoracic pathologists from the same institution was almost perfect for the modified Masaoka staging system ([kappa] = 0.85, n = 315) and the proposed Moran staging system ([kappa] = 0.81, n = 290) and substantial for the proposed IASLC/ITMIG staging system ([kappa] = 0.75, n = 81). (4) If evaluating only the T component of the proposed IASLC/ITMIG ([kappa] = 297), the agreement was also substantial ([kappa] = 0.75). Most common disagreements occurred between encapsulated and minimally invasive tumors, which would correspond to stage I and IIA tumors of the modified Masaoka staging system (15.8% of cases). When studying cases in which all 3 reviewers agreed upon extent of invasion, there was a significant difference in overall survival between modified Masaoka stage I and II patients. (40)
STAGING IS PROGNOSTICALLY SUPERIOR TO HISTOMORPHOLOGIC CLASSIFICATION IN THYMIC EPITHELIAL TUMORS
Although thymic carcinomas have consistently been shown to have a worse outcome than thymomas, (44-47) the prognostic significance of thymomas has been debated and reports in the literature are conflicting. This debate also gave rise to some histomorphologic classifications. The prognostic significance of the histomorphologic classification of thymomas was especially debated in the years leading up to the first WHO classification. Some pathologists suggested that the classification of thymomas into noninvasive and invasive tumors might be sufficient because there is no additional prognostic significance of more elaborated classifications. Others proposed to subclassify thymomas further because histology might correlate with outcome. Indeed, some evidence suggested that WHO and Bernatz classifications have prognostic value. (46,48-50) For instance, studies have shown significantly worse survival of B3 thymoma versus types A through B2 thymoma, (51) types A and AB thymoma, (52) or types A, AB, and B1 thymoma. (53) Recently, a study by Weis et al (54) evaluating 4221 thymomas submitted to the ITMIG retrospective database (including cases between 1983 and 2012) also showed that the WHO classification of thymomas was significantly associated with overall survival in univariate analysis, and although not all thymoma types differed from each other significantly, B3 thymomas had a worse overall survival in R0 resected patients than B1 thymomas. However, after adjusting for age, stage, and resection status, the WHO classification was no longer significant for overall survival. Other studies did not find differences in survival between type B3 thymoma or atypical thymoma and other thymomas (45,55) and failed to show an association of WHO or proposed Suster and Moran classification with outcome. (45,56,57)
These varying results might have been, at least in part, due to interobserver variation. Indeed, studies reported an only fair to moderate reproducibility of the 2004 WHO classification of TET, with [kappa] values ranging between 0.39 and 0.53 or an overall concordance rate of 63% to 70%. (58-61) Only if a weighted [kappa] was used, 1 study achieved good agreement for the 1999 WHO and the Bernatz classification ([kappa] = 0.87). (48) Interobserver agreement for the Mueller-Hermelink classification was reported as 78%. (62) Roden et al (4) compared the reproducibility of the 2004 WHO with the proposed Suster and Moran classification and the classification by Bernatz reviewing 456 TETs. Reproducibility was best for the proposed Suster and Moran classification ([kappa] = 0.74, substantial agreement) followed by the 2004 WHO classification ([kappa] = 0.65, substantial agreement) and the Bernatz classification ([kappa] = 0.52, moderate agreement). The most common disagreements occurred between B1 and B2 thymoma (2004 WHO classification), thymoma and atypical thymoma (proposed Suster and Moran classification), and lymphocyte predominant and mixed lymphocyte and epithelial cell thymoma (Bernatz classification). Moreover, this study showed that the only moderate to substantial reproducibility of histomorphologic classifications indeed plays a role in determining the prognostic significance of TET, with differences in prognosis between the 3 reviewers in multivariate analysis. (4) Therefore, Roden et al (40) evaluated the prognostic significance of thymoma using cases in which all 3 thoracic pathologists independently agreed upon a diagnosis. Univariate analysis confirmed that all histomorphologic classifications studied, including Bernatz, Suster and Moran, and WHO (2004), are of prognostic significance for overall and disease-free survival. However, in multivariate analysis, only Bernatz was prognostic for overall survival if adjusted for modified Masaoka staging. On the other hand, modified Masaoka staging and thymoma size were prognostic factors independent of histologic classification. Similarly, in the study by Weis et al (54) of the ITMIG retrospective database, stage, resection status, and age were independently associated with overall survival.
Taken together, these results suggest that histomorphologic classification is not an independent prognostic marker for thymoma and that staging plays an important role for outcome and therefore for management of thymomas, independent of the histomorphologic classification.
GENETIC ALTERATIONS IN THYMIC EPITHELIAL TUMORS
Loss of heterozygosity on chromosome 6q25.2-25.3 is common and has been identified in all types of TET except type B1 thymoma (Table 9). (28) A potential target of loss of heterozygosity in 6q25.2-25.3 is the tumor suppressor gene FOXC1. (28) In addition, Petrini et al (63) showed that frequent copy number loss of FOXC1 is associated with more aggressive tumors and correlates with decreased protein expression. More recently, GTF2I missense mutations have been found in types A and AB thymomas and less commonly in types B1, B2, and B3 thymomas. (64) These mutations were rather uncommon in thymic carcinoma (Table 9).
Using array comparative genomic hybridization, Petrini et al (65) identified homozygous 9p21.3 copy number loss in 2 of 7 thymic carcinomas (28.6%) and 2 of 20 type B3 thymomas (10%) but no other thymomas. The copy number loss peak of 9p21.3 included only CDKN2A/B loci. CDKN2A is a known tumor suppressor gene involved in the control of the cell cycle and may be related to uncontrolled tumor cell proliferation. In fact, focal deletion of 9p21.3 is a frequent event in cancer (40% overall and 16% focal copy number loss) (66) and is associated with poor outcome in patients with lymphoblastic leukemia. (67) Copy number loss of CDKN2A/B was associated with poor outcome (including disease-related survival and time to progression), suggesting that CDKN2A/B may be of potential value in the prognosis of TET. In addition, copy number loss of CDKN2A correlated with lack of expression of its related protein [p16.sup.INK4] (p16) in TET.
In vitro studies showed that siRNA knockdown of antiapoptotic molecules BCL2 and MCL1 leads to reduction of the proliferation of TET cell lines. (65) Gx15-070 (pan-BCL2 inhibitor) induced necrosis in TET cells and inhibited TET xenograft growth. ABT263 (inhibitor of BCL2/BCL-XL/BCLW) led to decreased TET cell proliferation when combined with sorafenib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor.
Overall, biology and genetic findings appear to vary with the histomorphologic type of TET according to the WHO.
A variety and a large number of histomorphologic and staging classifications for TET have been proposed during the era of Dr Thomas V. Colby, reflecting challenges to develop an easy-to-follow, reproducible, and therapeutically and prognostically meaningful classification that can be used for the evaluation of thymomas, thymic carcinomas, and thymic neuroendocrine tumors. The rarity of the disease makes its study even more difficult. Overall, staging is a prognostic marker of TET independent of histomorphologic classification. However, despite many attempts of staging classifications, currently there is no perfect staging system available that is suitable for treatment decisions and prognosis for all TETs. The recently proposed staging classification of IASLC/ITMIG shows promise when applied to a large global retrospective database. Although histomorphologic classifications are not prognostically significant independent of staging, tumor biologic and genetic features appear to differ among histologic subtypes of TET.
(1.) Engels EA. Epidemiology of thymoma and associated malignancies. J Thorac Oncol. 2010;5(10)(suppl 4):S260-S265.
(2.) de Jong WK, Blaauwgeers JL, Schaapveld M, Timens W, Klinkenberg TJ, Groen HJ. Thymic epithelial tumours: a population-based study of the incidence, diagnostic procedures and therapy. Eur J Cancer. 2008;44(1):123-130.
(3.) Engel PJ, Sabroe S. Thymomoa in Denmark [in Danish]. Ugeskr Laeger. 1997;159(21):3155-3159.
(4.) Roden AC, Yi ES, Jenkins SM, et al. Reproducibility of 3 histologic classifications and 3 staging systems for thymic epithelial neoplasms and its effect on prognosis. Am J Surg Pathol. 2015;39(4):427-441.
(5.) Safieddine N, Liu G, Cuningham K, et al. Prognostic factors for cure, recurrence and long-term survival after surgical resection of thymoma. J Thorac Oncol. 2014;9(7):1018-1022.
(6.) Huang J, Ahmad U, Antonicelli A, et al. Development of the international thymic malignancy interest group international database: an unprecedented resource for the study of a rare group of tumors. J Thorac Oncol. 2014;9(10): 1573-1578.
(7.) Ewing J. The thymus and its tumors. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1916;22:461-472.
(8.) Lowenhaupt E. Tumors of the thymus in relation to the thymic epithelial anlage. Cancer. 1948;1:547-563.
(9.) Bernatz P, Harrison E, Clagett O. Thymoma: a clinicopathological study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1961;42:424-444.
(10.) Bell E. Tumors of the thymus in myasthenia gravis. J Nerv Ment Dis. 1917; 45:130-140.
(11.) Ewing J. The thymus and its tumors. In: EwingJ, ed. Neoplastic Diseases; A Treatise on Tumors. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders; 1928:966-977.
(12.) Zeiller K, Dolan L. Thymus specific antigen on electrophoretically separated rat lymphocytes. Tracing of the differentiation pathway of bone marrow-derived thymocytes by use of a surface marker. Eur J Immunol. 1972;2(5): 439-444.
(13.) Rosai J, Levine G. Tumors of the Thymus. Washington DC: Armed Forces Institute of Pathology; 1976. Atlas of Tumor Pathology; 2nd series, fascicle 13.
(14.) Castleman B. Tumors of the Thymic Gland. Washington, DC: Armed Forces Institute of Pathology; 1955. Atlas of Tumor Pathology; fascicle 19, section V.
(15.) Effler DB, McCormack LJ. Thymic neoplasms. J Thorac Surg. 1956;31(1): 60-77; discussion 77-82.
(16.) Bernatz PE, Khonsari S, Harrison EG Jr, Taylor WF. Thymoma: factors influencing prognosis. Surg Clin North Am. 1973;53(4):885-892.
(17.) Wilkins EW Jr, Castleman B. Thymoma: a continuing survey at the Massachusetts General Hospital. Ann Thorac Surg. 1979;28(3):252-256.
(18.) Masaoka A, Monden Y, Nakahara K, Tanioka T. Follow-up study of thymomas with special reference to their clinical stages. Cancer. 1981;48(11): 2485-2492.
(19.) Nakajima J, Okumura M, Yano M, et al. Myasthenia gravis with thymic epithelial tumour: a retrospective analysis of a Japanese database [published online ahead of print November 3, 2015]. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2016;49(5): 1510-1515. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezv380.
(20.) Filosso PL, Evangelista A, Ruffini E, et al. Does myasthenia gravis influence overall survival and cumulative incidence of recurrence in thymoma patients?: a retrospective clinicopathological multicentre analysis on 797 patients. Lung Cancer. 2015;88(3):338-343.
(21.) Levine GD, Rosai J. Thymic hyperplasia and neoplasia: a review of current concepts. Hum Pathol. 1978;9(5):495-515.
(22.) Marino M, Muller-Hermelink HK. Thymoma and thymic carcinoma: relation of thymoma epithelial cells to the cortical and medullary differentiation of thymus. Virchows Arch A Pathol Anat Histopathol. 1985;407(2):119-149.
(23.) Kirchner T, Schalke B, Marx A, Muller-Hermelink HK. Evaluation of prognostic features in thymic epithelial tumors. Thymus. 1989;14(1-3):195-203.
(24.) Suster S, Moran CA. Thymoma, atypical thymoma, and thymic carcinoma: a novel conceptual approach to the classification of thymic epithelial neoplasms. Am J Clin Pathol. 1999;111(6):826-833.
(25.) Suster S, Moran CA. Primary thymic epithelial neoplasms: current concepts and controversies. In: Fechner RE, Rosen Pp eds. Anat Pathol. 1997(2):1-19.
(26.) Rosai J, Sobin LH. Histological Typing of Tumours of the Thymus. 2nd ed. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag; 1999. World Health Organization International Histological Classification of Tumours.
(27.) Travis WD, Brambilla E, Muller-Hermelink HK, Harris CC. Pathology and genetics of tumors of the lung, pleura, thymus and heart. In: Kleihues P, Sobin LH, eds. WHO Classification of Tumors. 2nd Ed. Lyon, France: IARC Press; 2004:145197.
(28.) Travis WD, Brambilla E, Burke AP, Marx A, Nicholson AG. WHO Classification of Tumours of the Lung, Pleura, Thymus and Heart. 4th ed. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2015.
(29.) Marx A, Chan JK, CoindreJM, et al. The 2015 World Health Organization classification of tumors of the thymus: continuity and changes. J Thorac Oncol. 2015;10(10):1383-1395.
(30.) Vladislav IT, Gokmen-Polar Y, Kesler KA, Loehrer PJ Sr, BadveS. The role of histology in predicting recurrence of type A thymomas: a clinicopathologic correlation of 23 cases. Mod Pathol. 2013;26(8):1059-1064.
(31.) Green AC, Marx A, Strobel P, et al. Type A and AB thymomas: histological features associated with increased stage. Histopathology. 2015;66(6):884-891.
(32.) Bergh NP, Gatzinsky P, Larsson S, Lundin P, Ridell B. Tumors of the thymus and thymic region, I: clinicopathological studies on thymomas. Ann ThoracSurg. 1978;25(2):91-98.
(33.) Koga K, Matsuno Y, Noguchi M, et al. A review of 79 thymomas: modification of staging system and reappraisal of conventional division into invasive and non-invasive thymoma. Pathol Int. 1994;44(5):359-367.
(34.) Groupe d'Etude des Tumeurs Thymiques. Organisation et Protocoles. City, Country: Publisher; 1982.
(35.) Girard N, Mornex F, Van Houtte P, Cordier JF. Thymoma and thymic carcinoma. In: Belkacemi Y, Mirimanoff R-O, Ozsahin M, eds. Management of Rare Adult Tumours. Paris, France: Springer; 2010:401-414.
(36.) Yamakawa Y, Masaoka A, Hashimoto T, et al. A tentative tumor-nodemetastasis classification of thymoma. Cancer. 1991;68(9):1984-1987.
(37.) Tsuchiya R, Koga K, Matsuno Y, Mukai K, Shimosato Y. Thymic carcinoma: proposal for pathological TNM and staging. Pathol Int. 1994;44(7):505-512.
(38.) Weissferdt A, Moran CA. Thymic carcinoma, part 2: a clinicopathologic correlation of 33 cases with a proposed staging system. Am J Clin Pathol. 2012; 138(1):115-121.
(39.) Moran CA, Walsh G, Suster S, Kaiser L. Thymomas II: a clinicopathologic correlation of 250 cases with a proposed staging system with emphasis on pathologic assessment. Am J Clin Pathol. 2012;137(3):451-461.
(40.) Roden AC, Yi ES, Jenkins SM, et al. Modified Masaoka stage and size are independent prognostic predictors in thymoma and modified Masaoka stage is superior to histopathologic classifications. J Thorac Oncol. 2015;10(4):691-700.
(41.) UICC. TNM Supplement: A Commentary on Uniform Use. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Wiley-Liss; 2003.
(42.) Detterbeck FC, Stratton K, Giroux D, et al. The IASLC/ITMIG thymic epithelial tumors staging project: proposal for an evidence-based stage classification system for the forthcoming (8th) edition of the TNM classification of malignant tumors. J Thorac Oncol. 2014;9(9)(suppl 2):S65-S72.
(43.) Gupta R, Marchevsky AM, McKenna RJ, et al. Evidence-based pathology and the pathologic evaluation of thymomas: transcapsular invasion is not a significant prognostic feature. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2008;132(6):926-930.
(44.) Detterbeck FC. Clinical value of the WHO classification system of thymoma. Ann Thorac Surg. 2006;81(6):2328-2334.
(45.) Sperling B, Marschall J, Kennedy R, Pahwa P, Chibbar R. Thymoma: a review of the clinical and pathological findings in 65 cases. Can J Surg. 2003; 46(1):37-42.
(46.) Wilkins KB, Sheikh E, Green R, et al. Clinical and pathologic predictors of survival in patients with thymoma. Ann Surg. 1999;230(4):562-572; discussion 572-574.
(47.) Mariano C, Ionescu DN, Cheung WY, et al. Thymoma: a population-based study of the management and outcomes for the province of British Columbia. J Thorac Oncol. 2013;8(1):109-117.
(48.) Rieker RJ, Hoegel J, Morresi-Hauf A, et al. Histologic classification of thymic epithelial tumors: comparison of established classification schemes. Int J Cancer. 2002;98(6):900-906.
(49.) Nakagawa K, Asamura H, Matsuno Y, et al. Thymoma: a clinicopathologic study based on the new World Health Organization classification. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2003;126(4):1134-1140.
(50.) Rena O, Papalia E, Maggi G, et al. World Health Organization histologic classification: an independent prognostic factor in resected thymomas. Lung Cancer. 2005;50(1):59-66.
(51.) Kim DJ, Yang WI, Choi SS, Kim KD, Chung KY. Prognostic and clinical relevance of the World Health Organization schema for the classification of thymic epithelial tumors: a clinicopathologic study of108 patients and literature review. Chest. 2005;127(3):755-761.
(52.) Kondo K, Yoshizawa K, Tsuyuguchi M, et al. WHO histologic classification is a prognostic indicator in thymoma. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004;77(4):1183-1188.
(53.) Rea F, Marulli G, Girardi R, etal. Long-term survival and prognostic factors in thymic epithelial tumours. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2004;26(2):412-418.
(54.) Weis CA, Yao X, Deng Y, et al. The impact of thymoma histotype on prognosis in a worldwide database. J Thorac Oncol. 2015;10(2):367-372.
(55.) Chalabreysse L, Roy P, Cordier JF, Loire R, GamondesJP, Thivolet-Bejui F. Correlation of the WHO schema for the classification of thymic epithelial neoplasms with prognosis: a retrospective study of 90 tumors. Am J Surg Pathol. 2002;26(12):1605-1611.
(56.) Harnath T, Marx A, Strobel P, Bolke E, Willers R, Gripp S. Thymoma--a clinico-pathological long-term study with emphasis on histology and adjuvant radiotherapy dose. J Thorac Oncol. 2012;7(12):1867-1871.
(57.) Ruffini E, Filosso PL, Mossetti C, et al. Thymoma: inter-relationships among World Health Organization histology, Masaoka staging and myasthenia gravis and their independent prognostic significance: a single-centre experience. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2011;40(1):146-153.
(58.) Zucali PA, Di Tommaso L, Petrini I, et al. Reproducibility of the WHO classification of thymomas: practical implications. Lung Cancer. 2013;79(3):236241.
(59.) Verghese ET, den Bakker MA, Campbell A, et al. Interobserver variation in the classification of thymic tumours--a multicentre study using the WHO classification system. Histopathology. 2008;53(2):218-223.
(60.) Sakakura N, Tateyama H, Nakamura S, et al. Diagnostic reproducibility of thymic epithelial tumors using the World Health Organization classification: note for thoracic clinicians. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013;61(2):89-95.
(61.) Wang H, Sima CS, Beasley MB, et al. Classification of thymic epithelial neoplasms is still a challenge to thoracic pathologists: a reproducibility study using digital microscopy. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2014;138(5):658-663.
(62.) Close PM, Kirchner T, Uys CJ, Muller-Hermelink HK. Reproducibility of a histogenetic classification of thymic epithelial tumours. Histopathology. 1995; 26(4):339-343.
(63.) Petrini I, Wang Y, Zucali PA, et al. Copy number aberrations of genes regulating normal thymus development in thymic epithelial tumors. Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19(8):1960-1971.
(64.) Petrini I, Meltzer PS, Kim IK, et al. A specific missense mutation in GTF2I occurs at high frequency in thymic epithelial tumors. Nat Genet. 2014;46(8): 844-849.
(65.) Petrini I, Meltzer PS, Zucali PA, et al. Copy number aberrations of BCL2 and CDKN2A/B identified by array-CGH in thymic epithelial tumors. Cell Death Dis. 2012;3:e351.
(66.) Beroukhim R, Mermel CH, Porter D, et al. The landscape of somatic copy-number alteration across human cancers. Nature. 2010;463(7283):899-905.
(67.) Kim M, Yim SH, Cho NS, et al. Homozygous deletion of CDKN2A (p16, p14) and CDKN2B (p15) genes is a poor prognostic factor in adult but not in childhood B-lineage acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a comparative deletion and hypermethylation study. Cancer Genet Cytogenet. 2009;195(1):59-65. Anja C. Roden, MD
Accepted for publication June 2, 2016.
From the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, Rochester, Minnesota.
The author has no relevant financial interest in the products or companies described in this article.
Portions based on a presentation given at the 2016 Mayo Clinic Pathology Update: A Tribute to the Career of Thomas V. Colby, MD meeting; February 4, 2016;Phoenix, Arizona.
Reprints: Anja C. Roden, MD, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905 (email: firstname.lastname@example.org). Please Note: Illustration(s) are not available due to copyright restrictions.
Caption: Figure 1. Epithelial cells in the benign thymic gland. The benign thymic gland contains large, stellate cortical epithelial cells that are characterized by round or oval medium-to-large nuclei with prominent nucleoli and scant eosinophilic cytoplasm (A, arrows) and spindle medullary epithelial cells with oval-to-spindle small-to-medium nuclei without or with inconspicuous nucleoli and scant eosinophilic cytoplasm (B, arrow). The epithelial cells are highlighted by keratin AE1/AE3 immunostain (A and B, insets) (hematoxylin-eosin, original magnification X600 [A and B]; keratin AE1/AE3 immunostain, original magnification X600 [A and B, insets]).
Caption: Figure 2. Histomorphologic classification by Suster and Moran. (24) A, The well-differentiated thymoma is characterized by preserved organotypic features including lobulated growth pattern and a mixture of epithelial tumor cells and thymocytes (inset). B, The moderately differentiated atypical thymoma shows a lobulated architecture; however, the neoplastic epithelial cells are cytologically more atypical and at most only occasional thymocytes are scattered throughout the tumor (inset). C and D, The poorly differentiated thymic epithelial tumor, the thymic carcinoma, lacks a lobulated architecture and is characterized by irregular tumor cell nests surrounded by a desmoplastic stromal reaction (C). The tumor cells are cytologically atypical and thymocytes are absent (D) (hematoxylin-eosin, original magnifications X12.5 [A and B], X20 [C], and X400 [A and B, insets, and D]).
Caption: Figure 3. Histomorphologic classification by the World Health Organization. A, Type A thymomas are characterized by bland-appearing spindle cells with absent or only scattered thymocytes (inset). B, This type AB thymoma comprises a type B2 component (upper left-hand side, upper inset) and a type A component (lower right-hand side, lower inset), which are next to each other in this case. C, At low magnification a type B1 thymoma is in general recognized by medullary islands (arrows) that sometimes contain Hassall corpuscle-like particles (upper inset). There are only scattered neoplastic epithelial cells in a background of predominantly thymocytes (lower inset). D, On low magnification type B2 thymomas often have a starry-sky appearance because of the mixture of medium-to-large neoplastic epithelial cells and thymocytes (inset). E, Type B3 thymomas have a lobulated appearance on low power; thymocytes are only scattered or absent (inset). F, The thymic carcinoma has a distorted architecture and is composed of irregular nests of cytologically atypical tumor cells (inset) surrounded by a desmoplastic stroma (hematoxylin-eosin, original magnifications X40 [A, B, and D through F], X20 [C], and X600 [A through F, insets]).
Caption: Figure 4. Uncommon thymomas. A, The micronodular thymoma with lymphoid stroma is characterized by nests and strands of bland-appearing spindle tumor cells (inset) in a lymphocytic background. The background might contain germinal centers (arrow). B, This microscopic thymoma measures 0.9 mm in greatest dimension and lacks a distinct tumor capsule. It is composed of bland-appearing spindle cells (inset). C and D, A metaplastic thymoma is composed of nests and strands of bland-appearing tumor epithelial cells, some of which can contain nuclear pseudoinclusions (D, right-hand side) and are surrounded by metaplastic spindle cells (D, left-hand side) (hematoxylin- eosin, original magnifications X20 [A and C], X40 [B], and X400 [A and B, insets, and D]).
Caption: Figure 5. Distinction of type B1 from type B2 thymoma using the World Health Organization 2015 criteria. A type Bi thymoma (A) is defined by scattered epithelial tumor cells with fewer than 3 clustering together (arrows), in contrast to a type B2 thymoma (B), in which 3 or more tumor cells might cluster (arrows) (hematoxylin-eosin, original magnification X600).
Caption: Figure 6. Pathologic criteria (2004 World Health Organization) to facilitate staging according to the modified Masaoka (Masaoka-Koga) staging system. A, Encapsulated thymoma, stage I. In some thymomas, the tumor capsule might be thin or the tumor might invade into the capsule (arrow and inset); however, no invasion of the tumor through the capsule is identified. B, Minimally invasive thymoma, stage IIA. The thymoma has invaded through the tumor capsule into the surrounding adipose tissue (arrow and inset). C, Widely invasive thymoma, stage IIIA. This thymoma invades directly into lung parenchyma. D through F, Metastatic thymoma, stage IVB. Thymoma can metastasize to various organs, including the lung (D, type A thymoma; D inset), ovary (E; arrow points toward ovarian stroma) or bone (F; F inset shows metastatic thymic carcinoma on the left and a megakaryocyte of the bone marrow on the right with arrow pointing toward a megakaryocyte) (hematoxylin-eosin, original magnifications X12.5 [A through D], X100 [A, inset], X200 [B, inset], X400 [D and F, insets], and X40 [E and F]).
Table 1. Histomorphologic Classifications and Staging Systems of Thymic Epithelial Tumors Proposed During the Last Century Histomorphologic Classifications Year Author Country 1928 James Ewing United States 1932 Douglas Symmers United States 1940 James Ewing United States 1941 C. Alexander Hellwig United States 1948 Elizabeth Lowenhaupt United States 1950 William D. Seybold United States 1955 Benjamin Castleman United States 1956 Lalla Iverson United States 1956 Donald B. Effler United States 1957 Raffaele Lattes United States 1957 A. D. Thomson United Kingdom 1959 George D. Andritsakis United States 1961 Philipp E. Bernatz United States 1965 Merle A. Legg United States 1966 Hiroshi Watanabe Japan 1976 Juan Rosai and Gerald D. Levine United States 1978 Gerald D. Levine and Juan Rosai United States 1985 Mirella Marino and Hans Konrad Germany Muller-Hermelink 1989 Thomas Kirchnerand Hans Germany Konrad Muller-Hermelink 1999 Saul Suster and Cesar A. Moran United States 1999 World Health Organization 2000 T.-T. Kuo Taiwan 2004 World Health Organization 2015 World Health Organization Staging Systems 1961 Philipp E. Bernatz United States 1978 N. P. Bergh Sweden 1978 Gerald D. Levine and Juan Rosai United States 1979 Earle W. Wilkins and Benjamin United States Castleman 1981 Akira Masaoka Japan 1982 Groupe d'Etude des Tumeurs France Thymiques 1985 Jeanne M. Verle France 1991 Yosuke Yamakawa and Akira Japan Masaoka (TNM) 1994 Kenji Koga Japan 1994 Ryosuke Tsuchiya and Kenji Koga Japan (TNM) 1997 Saul Suster and Cesar A. Moran United States 2003 Tumor-Node-Metastasis 2012 Cesar A. Moran United States 2014 International Association for Study of Lung Cancer/International Thymic Malignancy Interest Group Table 2. Selected Histomorphologic Classifications of Thymic Epithelial Tumors Ewing, (11) 1928 Lymphosarcoma or thymoma Carcinoma arising from reticulum cells Spindle cell or myxosarcoma Lowenhaupt, (8) 1948 I. Carcinoma of primitive epithelial reticulum II. Carcinoma of variegated cell pattern (carcinoma of early Hassall corpuscles) III. Carcinoma of granulomatous pattern (carcinoma of late Hassall corpuscles) IV. Carcinoma of thymic round cell: lymphoepithelioma V. Encapsulated thymoma VI. Carcinoma of adamantinomatous pattern Bernatz et al, (9) 1961 Thymoma of predominantly Spindle cell type Lymphocytic type Mixed type (reticuloepithelial-lymphocytic) Epithelial type Levine and Rosai, (21) 1978 Encapsulated thymoma Malignant thymoma I. Locally invasive thymoma Thymoma with lymphatic or hematogenous spread II. Cytologically malignant (thymic carcinoma) Marino and Muller-Hermelink, (22) 1985 Medullary thymoma (medullary epithelial cells and scant, usually negligible lymphoid cells) Mixed thymoma (cortical and medullary epithelial cells, high number of lymphocytes) Predominantly cortical Predominantly medullary Cortical thymoma (cortical epithelial cells) Thymic carcinoma Kirchner et al, (23) 1989 Medullary thymoma Mixed thymoma Predominantly cortical thymoma Cortical thymoma Well-differentiated thymic carcinoma Thymic carcinoma Suster and Moran, (24) 1999 Thymoma Well differentiated Atypical thymoma Moderately differentiated Thymic carcinoma Poorly differentiated WHO, (26-28) 1999, 2004, 2015 WHO Type A Atypical type A varianta AB B1 B2 B3 C/thymic carcinoma (b) Morphologic Features Bland spindle/oval tumor cells, rare or no thymocytes Type A criteria and atypia (hypercellularity, increased mitotic count, focal tumor necrosis) Type A and type B1 or type B2 Scattered neoplastic cells in a background of thymocytes Presence of medullary elements Mixture of neoplastic cells and thymocytes Increased cytologic atypia of neoplastic cells Polygonal neoplastic cells with conspicuous nucleoli Thymic carcinoma Cytologic atypia Architecture distorted Desmoplasia Abbreviation: WHO, World Health Organization. (a) 2015 classification only. (b) Type C (1999 classification) was designated as thymic carcinoma in the 2004 and 2015 WHO classifications. Table 3. Cytologic Characteristics of Epithelial Cells of the Benign Thymic Gland (22) Thymic Epithelial Cell Medullary Cortical Shape Spindle Stellate Nucleus Oval-spindle Oval-round Size Small-medium Medium-large Nucleolus +/-, not prominent Prominent if present Cytoplasm Scant, dense Scant, clear or eosinophilic faintly eosinophilic Abbreviation: +/-, nucleolus might or might not be present and if a nucleolus is present then it is not prominent. Table 4. Organotypic Features of Differentiation of the Thymus as Defined by Suster and Moran (24) Lobular architecture Dual cell population (neoplastic thymic epithelial cells, thymic lymphocytes) Dilated perivascular spaces Areas of medullary differentiation (+/- Hassall corpuscles) (a) (a) +/-, may or may not be present. Table 5. Thymic Carcinoma Subtypes According to 2015 World Health Organization Classification (28) Squamous cell carcinoma Basaloid carcinoma Mucoepidermoid carcinoma Lymphoepithelioma-like carcinoma Clear cell carcinoma Sarcomatoid carcinoma Adenocarcinomas Thymic carcinoma NUT carcinoma Undifferentiated carcinoma Others Thymic neuroendocrine tumors including: Carcinoid tumors (typical, atypical carcinoid) Large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma Small cell carcinoma Abbreviation: NUT, nuclear protein of testis. Table 6. Selected Proposed Staging Systems for Thymic Epithelial Tumors 1961 Through 1994 Bernatz et al, (9) 1961 Noninvasive Invasive Bergh et al, (32) 1978 Stage Definition I Intact capsule; growth within capsule II Pericapsular growth into mediastinal fat tissue III Invasive growth into surrounding organs, intrathoracic metastases or both Wilkins and Castleman, (17) 1979 Stage Definition I Intact capsule or growth within capsule II Pericapsular growth into the mediastinal fat tissue or adjacent pleura or pericardium III Invasive growth into the surrounding organs, intrathoracic metastases, or both Masaoka et al, (18) 1981, and modified Masaoka (Koga et al, (33) 1994) staging Stage Masaoka I Macroscopically completely encapsulated, microscopically no capsular invasion II 2. Microscopic invasion into capsule 1. Macroscopic invasion into surrounding fat or mediastinal pleura III Macroscopic invasion into neighboring organs IV A. Pleural or pericardial dissemination B. Lymphogenous or hematogenous metastasis Staging Classification of the Groupe d'Etude des Tumeurs Thymiques, (34) 1982 Stage Definition IA Encapsulated tumor, totally resected IB Macroscopically encapsulated tumor, totally resected, perioperative suspicion of mediastinal adhesion or potential capsular invasion II Invasive tumor, totally resected IIIA Invasive tumor, subtotally resected IIIB Invasive tumor, biopsy IVA Supraclavicular metastasis or distant pleural droplets IVB Distant metastasis TNM classification of thymic epithelial tumors by Yamakawa et al, (36) 1991; pathologic TNM classification of thymic epithelial tumors by Tsuchiya et al, (37) 1994; and TNM classification of malignant thymic epithelial tumors as recommended by the 2015 World Health Organization (28) classification Yamakawa et al TX T0 T1 Macroscopically completely encapsulated and microscopically no capsular invasion T2 Macroscopically adhesion or invasion into surrounding fatty tissue or mediastinal pleura, or microscopic invasion into capsules T3 Invasion into neighboring organs, such as pericardium, great vessels, and lung T4 Pleural or pericardial dissemination NX N0 No lymph node metastasis N1 Metastasis to anterior mediastinal lymph nodes N2 Metastasis to intrathoracic lymph nodes except anterior mediastinal lymph nodes N3 Metastasis to extrathoracic lymph nodes M0 No hematogenous metastasis M1 Hematogenous metastasis Stage I T1 N0 M0 II T2 N0 M0 III T3 N0 M0 IV IVa T4 NO MO IVb [T.sub.any] N1,2 or 3 M0 [T.sub.any] [N.sub.any] M1 IVc Bernatz et al, (9) 1961 Noninvasive Invasive Bergh et al, (32) 1978 Stage I II III Wilkins and Castleman, (17) 1979 Stage I II III Masaoka et al, (18) 1981, and modified Masaoka (Koga et al, (33) 1994) staging Stage Modified Masaoka (Koga) I Macroscopically completely encapsulated, microscopically no capsular invasion II A. Microscopic transcapsular invasion B. Macroscopic invasion into extracapsular soft tissue, or tumor grossly adherent to mediastinal pleura or pericardium III Macroscopic invasion into neighboring organs IV A. Pleural or pericardial dissemination B. Lymphogenous or hematogenous metastasis Staging Classification of the Groupe d'Etude des Tumeurs Thymiques, (34) 1982 Stage IA IB II IIIA IIIB IVA IVB TNM classification of thymic epithelial tumors by Yamakawa et al, (36) 1991; pathologic TNM classification of thymic epithelial tumors by Tsuchiya et al, (37) 1994; and TNM classification of malignant thymic epithelial tumors as recommended by the 2015 World Health Organization (28) classification Tsuchiya et al TX T0 T1 Macroscopically completely encapsulated and microscopically no capsular invasion T2 Tumor breaking through capsule, invading thymus or fatty tissue (maybe adherent to mediastinal pleura but not invading neighboring organs) T3 Breaking through the mediastinal pleura or pericardium, or invading neighboring organs, such as great vessels and lung T4 Pleural or pericardial dissemination NX N0 No lymph node metastasis N1 Metastasis to anterior mediastinal lymph nodes N2 Metastasis to intrathoracic lymph nodes except anterior mediastinal lymph nodes N3 Metastasis to extrathoracic lymph nodes M0 No hematogenous metastasis M1 Hematogenous metastasis Stage I T1,2 N0 M0 II T1,2 N1 M0 III T3 NO,1 M0 IV IVa T4 N0,1 M0 IVb Tany N2,3 M0 IVc [T.sub.any] [N.sub.any] M1 Bernatz et al, (9) 1961 Noninvasive Invasive Bergh et al, (32) 1978 Stage I II III Wilkins and Castleman, (17) 1979 Stage I II III Masaoka et al, (18) 1981, and modified Masaoka (Koga et al, (33) 1994) staging Stage I II III IV Staging Classification of the Groupe d'Etude des Tumeurs Thymiques, (34) 1982 Stage IA IB II IIIA IIIB IVA IVB TNM classification of thymic epithelial tumors by Yamakawa et al, (36) 1991; pathologic TNM classification of thymic epithelial tumors by Tsuchiya et al, (37) 1994; and TNM classification of malignant thymic epithelial tumors as recommended by the 2015 World Health Organization (28) classification World Health Organization 2015 TX Primary tumor cannot be assessed T0 No evidence of primary tumor T1 Macroscopically completely encapsulated and microscopically no capsular invasion T2 Tumor invades pericapsular connective tissue T3 Tumor invades into neighboring structures, such as pericardium, mediastinal pleura, thoracic wall, great vessels, and lung T4 Pleural or pericardial dissemination NX Regional lymph nodes cannot be assessed N0 No lymph node metastasis N1 Metastasis to anterior mediastinal lymph nodes N2 Metastasis to intrathoracic lymph nodes except anterior mediastinal lymph nodes N3 Metastases in scalene and/or supraclavicular lymph nodes M0 No distant metastasis M1 Distant metastasis Stage I T1 N0 M0 II T2 N0 M0 III T1,2 N1 M0 T3 N0,1 M0 IV T4 [N.sub.any] M0 [T.sub.any] N2,3 M0 [T.sub.any] [N.sub.any] M1 IVa IVb IVc Table 7. Selected Proposed Staging Systems for Thymic Epithelial Tumors From 1997 Through 2014 Suster and Moran, (25) 1997 Stage Definition I Well encapsulated tumor II Infiltrative or locally invasive tumor III Lymph node or distant metastasis Staging of Thymic Carcinomas as Proposed by Weissferdt and Moran, (38) 2012 Definition T1 Tumor limited to thymic gland T2 Tumor invading visceral pleura, lung, pericardium, great vessels, chest wall or diaphragm T3 Direct extrathoracic tumor extension, beyond thoracic inlet or diaphragm N0 No lymph node metastasis N1 Lymph node metastasis to intrathoracic lymph node M0 No distant metastasis M1 Distant metastasis Stage I T1 N0 M0 II T2 N0 M0 III T3 N0 M0 Tany N1 M0 [T.sub.any] [N.sub.any] M1 Staging of Thymomas as Proposed by Moran et al, (39) 2012 Stage Definition 0 Encapsulated tumor I Tumor invasive into perithymic adipose tissue II Direct invasion A Innominate vein, mediastinal pleura, lung B Pericardium C Great vessels (aorta, superior vena cava), heart III Metastatic disease A Intrathoracic structures, diaphragm, lymph nodes B Extrathoracic invasion Staging of Thymic Epithelial Tumors as Proposed by IASLC/ITMIG, (42) 2014 T1 Definition (Involvement of) (a) a Encapsulated or unencapsulated, with or without extension into mediastinal fat b Extension into mediastinal pleura T2 Pericardium T3 Lung, brachiocephalic vein, superior vena cava, chest wall, phrenic nerve, hilar (extrapericardial), pulmonary vessels T4 Aorta, arch vessels, main pulmonary artery, myocardium, trachea, esophagus N0 No lymph node involvement N1 Anterior (perithymic) lymph nodes N2 Deep intrathoracic or cervical lymph nodes M0 No metastatic pleural, pericardial, or distant sites M1 a Separate pleural or pericardial nodule(s) b Pulmonary intraparenchymal nodule or distant organ metastasis Stage I T1 N0 M0 II T2 N0 M0 IIIa T3 N0 M0 IIIb T4 N0 M0 IVa [T.sub.any] [N.sub.1] M0 [T.sub.any] N0 or 1 M1a IVb [T.sub.any] N2 M0 or 1a [T.sub.any] [N.sub.any] M1b Abbreviations: IASLC, International Association of Study of Lung Cancer;ITMIG, International Thymic Malignancy Interest Group. (a) A tumor is classified according to the highest level of invasion regardless whether invasion of structures of lower levels is present or not. Table 8. 1999 and 2004 World Health Organization Criteria for Invasion and Metastasis (26,27) World Health Organization Category Definition Encapsulated No invasion through the tumor capsule Minimally invasive Invasion through tumor capsule into surrounding adipose tissue Widely invasive Invasion into neighboring organs including lung, pericardium, great vessels Implants Tumor nodules on pleura, pericardium, and diaphragm Lymph node metastasis Mediastinal and supraclavicular lymph nodes Distant metastases Lung, liver, skeletal system, others Table 9. Common Genetic Abnormalities in Thymic Epithelial Tumors (a) World Health Loss of Heterozygosity in GTF2I Missense Mutation, Organization 6q25.2-25.3 Identified % of Cases A Yes 82 AB Yes 74 B1 No 32 B2 Yes 22 B3 Yes 21 Thymic Yes 8 carcinoma World Health Organization Other Genetic Abnormalities A AB Genetic alterations are more frequent and complex than for type A thymoma Type A areas appear genetically different from type A thymomas Similar high frequency of GTF2I mutation to type A thymomas B1 B2 More alterations than type A, less than type B3 B3 Copy number gain of BCL2, loss of CDKN2A/B- associated with poor outcome Thymic KIT mutation (up to 11% of cases) carcinoma Copy number gain of BCL2, loss of CDKN2A (a) Data derived from World Health Organization 2015 classification, (28) Petrini et al, (64,65) and Beroukhim et al. (66)
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Author:||Roden, Anja C.|
|Publication:||Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine|
|Date:||Feb 1, 2017|
|Previous Article:||Correlation of Prenatal Diagnosis and Pathology Findings Following Dilation and Evacuation for Fetal Anomalies.|
|Next Article:||Pathology of Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic Antibody--Associated Pulmonary and Renal Disease.|