Development of a cost-effective diagnostic algorithm incorporating transcription factor immunohistochemistry in the evaluation of pituitary tumours.

PURPOSE: To determine the utility of the 2022 WHO Classification of pituitary tumours in routine clinical practice and to develop an optimal diagnostic algorithm for evaluation of tumour type in a real-world setting. METHODS: Retrospective evaluation of pituitary tumour immunohistochemistry (IHC), operatively managed at St Vincent's Hospital Sydney, between 2019 and 2021. Routine IHC comprised evaluation of transcription factors [steroidogenic factor 1 (SF1), T-box transcription factor 19 (TPIT) and pituitary-specific positive transcription factor (PIT1)] and anterior pituitary hormones. Three tiered algorithms were tested, in which hormone IHC was performed selectively based on the initial transcription factor results. These were applied retrospectively and compared with current practice 'gold standard' comprising all transcription factor and hormone IHC. Diagnostic accuracy and cost were evaluated for each. RESULTS: There were 113 tumours included in the analysis. All three algorithms resulted in 100% concordance with the 'gold standard' in the characterisation of tumour lineage. While all three were associated with relative cost reduction, Algorithm #3, which omitted hormone IHC in the setting of positive SF1 or TPIT and performed IHC for growth hormone, prolactin and thyroid stimulating hormone only in the setting of PIT1 positivity, was the most cost-efficient. Additionally, there were 12/113 tumours with no distinct cell lineage. CONCLUSION: A diagnostic algorithm omitting hormone IHC except in cases of PIT1 positivity is an accurate and cost-effective approach to diagnose the type of pituitary tumour. A significant subgroup of pituitary tumours with no distinct cell lineage, frequently plurihormonal, remains difficult to classify with the new WHO criteria and requires further evaluation.

Urinary steroid profiling in diagnostic evaluation of an unusual adrenal mass.

SUMMARY: Adrenal oncocytomas are rare tumours, with only approximately 160 cases reported in the literature. We report the use of urinary steroid profiling as part of their diagnostic evaluation and prognostication. A 45-year-old woman presented with clinical features of hyperandrogenism. Serum biochemistry confirmed androgen excess and computed tomography (CT) demonstrated a 3.2 cm adrenal tumour with density 39 HU pre-contrast. Urine steroid profiling showed elevated tetrahydro-11 deoxycortisol (THS), which is associated with adrenal malignancy. Laparoscopic adrenalectomy was performed, and histopathology diagnosed adrenal oncocytoma. Serum and urinary biochemistry resolved post-operatively and remained normal at 1-year follow-up. LEARNING POINTS: Differential diagnosis of adrenal masses is challenging. Current techniques for differentiating between tumour types lack sensitivity and specificity. 24-h urinary steroid profiling is a useful tool for reflecting steroid output from adrenal glands. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) of urinary steroid metabolites has sensitivity and specificity of 90% for diagnosing adrenocortical carcinoma. Adrenal oncocytoma are rare tumours. Differentiating between benign and malignant types is difficult. Data guiding prognostication and management are sparse.