Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: Am J Surg Pathol. 2020 Jul;44(7):e47–e65. doi: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000001476

Table 2:

Tools for recognition of MIT family translocation-associated RCC

  • Clinical:
    • Young age raises suspicion (but occurrence in age 50+ may be more common due to rarity of RCC in young patients)
  • Morphology:
    • Mixture of clear and eosinophilic cells
    • Mixture of papillary and nested architecture
    • Psammoma bodies
    • Hyalinized stroma
    • Unusually voluminous cytoplasm
    • Pigment deposition
  • Immunohistochemistry:
    • TFE3 or TFEB protein – strong nuclear labelling in a clean background (but can be technically challenging)
    • Carbonic anhydrase IX – minimal or negative staining
    • Melanocytic markers – often positive
    • Cathepsin K – often positive (but depends on gene fusion)
    • Cytokeratin or vimentin – may be minimal or decreased (but variable)
  • Molecular:
    • Break-apart FISH – will detect most rearrangements (but certain fusions by chromosomal inversion may be subtle or false-negative)
    • Polymerase chain reaction or next generation sequencing – will detect rearrangements with false-negative FISH (depending on method, may require knowledge of both partners)