Carcinoma in Situ

Although heterogeneity of FAP+ Cancer-Associated Fibroblasts (CAF) has been described in breast cancer, their plasticity and spatial distribution remain poorly understood. Here, we analyze trajectory inference, deconvolute spatial transcriptomics at single-cell level and perform functional assays to generate a high-resolution integrated map of breast cancer (BC), with a focus on inflammatory and myofibroblastic (iCAF/myCAF) FAP+ CAF clusters. We identify 10 spatially-organized FAP+ CAF-related cellular niches, called EcoCellTypes, which are differentially localized within tumors. Consistent with their spatial organization, cancer cells drive the transition of detoxification-associated iCAF (Detox-iCAF) towards immunosuppressive extracellular matrix (ECM)-producing myCAF (ECM-myCAF) via a DPP4- and YAP-dependent mechanism. In turn, ECM-myCAF polarize TREM2+ macrophages, regulatory NK and T cells to induce immunosuppressive EcoCellTypes, while Detox-iCAF are associated with FOLR2+ macrophages in an immuno-protective EcoCellType. FAP+ CAF subpopulations accumulate differently according to the invasive BC status and predict invasive recurrence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), which could help in identifying low-risk DCIS patients eligible for therapeutic de-escalation.

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) represents pre-invasive breast carcinoma. In untreated cases, 25-60% DCIS progress to invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). The challenge lies in distinguishing between non-progressive and progressive DCIS, often resulting in over- or under-treatment in many cases. With increasing screen-detected DCIS in these years, the nature of DCIS has aroused worldwide attention. A deeper understanding of the biological nature of DCIS and the molecular journey of the DCIS-IDC transition is crucial for more effective clinical management. Here, we reviewed the key signaling pathways in breast cancer that may contribute to DCIS initiation and progression. We also explored the molecular features of DCIS and IDC, shedding light on the progression of DCIS through both inherent changes within tumor cells and alterations in the tumor microenvironment. In addition, valuable research tools utilized in studying DCIS including preclinical models and newer advanced technologies such as single-cell sequencing, spatial transcriptomics and artificial intelligence, have been systematically summarized. Further, we thoroughly discussed the clinical advancements in DCIS and IDC, including prognostic biomarkers and clinical managements, with the aim of facilitating more personalized treatment strategies in the future. Research on DCIS has already yielded significant insights into breast carcinogenesis and will continue to pave the way for practical clinical applications.

BackgroundAbnormal angiogenesis is crucial for gallbladder cancer (GBC) tumor growth and invasion, highlighting the importance of elucidating the mechanisms underlying this process. LncRNA (long non-coding RNA) is widely involved in the malignancy of GBC. However, conclusive evidence confirming the correlation between lncRNAs and angiogenesis in GBC is lacking.MethodsLncRNA sequencing was performed to identify the differentially expressed lncRNAs. RT-qPCR, western blot, FISH, and immunofluorescence were used to measure TRPM2-AS and NOTCH1 signaling pathway expression in vitro. Mouse xenograft and lung metastasis models were used to evaluate the biological function of TRPM2-AS during angiogenesis in vivo. EDU, transwell, and tube formation assays were used to detect the angiogenic ability of HUVECs. RIP, RAP, RNA pull-down, dual-luciferase reporter system, and mass spectrometry were used to confirm the interaction between TRPM2-AS, IGF2BP2, NUMB, and PABPC1.ResultsTRPM2-AS was upregulated in GBC tissues and was closely related to angiogenesis and poor prognosis in patients with GBC. The high expression level and stability of TRPM2-AS benefited from m6A modification, which is recognized by IGF2BP2. In terms of exerting pro-angiogenic effects, TRPM2-AS loaded with exosomes transported from GBC cells to HUVECs enhanced PABPC1-mediated NUMB expression inhibition, ultimately promoting the activation of the NOTCH1 signaling pathway. PABPC1 inhibited NUMB mRNA expression through interacting with AGO2 and promoted miR-31-5p and miR-146a-5p-mediated the degradation of NUMB mRNA. The NOTCH signaling pathway inhibitor DAPT inhibited GBC tumor angiogenesis, and TRPM2-AS knockdown enhanced this effect.ConclusionsTRPM2-AS is a novel and promising biomarker for GBC angiogenesis that promotes angiogenesis by facilitating the activation of the NOTCH1 signaling pathway. Targeting TRPM2-AS opens further opportunities for future GBC treatments.

Conflicting practice recommendations regarding the grading of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDCP) from two leading uropathology societies, the Genitourinary Pathology Society (GUPS) and the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP), are confusing for both pathologists and treating clinicians. The objectives of this consultation were to clarify unresolved issues regarding IDCP and atypical intraductal proliferation (AIP) terminology, diagnostic criteria, grading, and management implications, as well as to develop uniform reporting guidelines for IDCP and AIP, endorsed by both societies. A 32-member expert panel, composed of five core members, 25 expert urological pathologists, and two expert urologists, employed a modified Delphi process consisting of multiple rounds of consultation and voting. These were supplemented by discussions at the 2025 United States and Canadian Academy of Pathologists Annual Meeting to achieve expert consensus (defined as at least 67% agreement). Consensus was reached on several key issues. IDCP was regarded most commonly as reflecting the retrograde spread of invasive prostate cancer (PCa). IDCP diagnosis should be based on the Guo and Epstein criteria, supported by basal cell immunohistochemistry in cases that are difficult to distinguish from invasive PCa. The term AIP should be used only in equivocal proliferations where IDCP is favoured but the criteria are not fully met, and these should be reported as 'AIP, suspicious for IDCP'. In the presence of invasive PCa, IDCP should generally be incorporated into Gleason grading irrespective of Grade Group (GG). However, a significant minority (30%) favoured excluding IDCP from the Gleason score if the invasive component was solely Gleason pattern (GP) 3. Pure IDCP (not associated with invasive PCa) and AIP, suspicious for IDCP, should not be graded. IDCP should not be incorporated in the grading of invasive PCa when it is spatially distinct from invasive PCa. A second opinion from a senior or dedicated GU pathologist and discussion within a multidisciplinary management setting should be considered, in the rare settings of pure IDCP or GP3 + IDCP (formerly GG1 + IDCP scenario). This joint GUPS-ISUP consultation provides unified recommendations for the diagnosis, terminology, grading, and reporting of IDCP and AIP, and will pave the way for the development of future IDCP/AIP WHO guidelines. Their adoption should reduce interobserver variation, facilitate consistent communication with clinicians, and improve patient management.