Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

LIVE: Thursday 2nd May 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

Quality sleep is essential for health. But what happens to our brains when sleep patterns are disturbed? Join our experts to explore the interplay between sleep disruption and neurological diseases, and the questions that you need to be asking your patients to help you prevent the harmful effects of sleep deprivation.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Current Urology Reports
Published in: Current Urology Reports 7/2016

01-07-2016 | New Imaging Techniques (A Rastinehad and S Rais-Bahrami, Section Editors)

Correlating Preoperative Imaging with Histologic Subtypes of Renal Cell Carcinoma and Common Mimickers

Authors: Jennifer Gordetsky, Jessica Zarzour

Published in: Current Urology Reports | Issue 7/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) consists of distinct subtypes that have unique pathologic and imaging features as well as specific cytogenetic and molecular characteristics. As the prognosis and therapeutic strategies may differ for each subtype, correlation of the preoperative imaging with the pathologic findings is of great clinical relevance. In addition, differentiation of RCC from benign entities is ideal in order to prevent overtreatment. However, a noninvasive diagnosis with imaging alone is not always straightforward due to the overlapping appearance of RCC with benign lesions such as fat-poor angiomyolipoma and oncocytoma. With new imaging modalities, there have been significant improvements in correlating preoperative imaging with pathologic characteristics. These new discoveries are able to aid in a more specific, noninvasive, diagnosis that in turn helps direct patient management.
Literature
1.
Pantuck AJ, Zisman A, Belldegrun AS. The changing natural history of renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. 2001;166(5):1611–23.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Belldegrun A, deKernion JB. Renal tumors. In: Walsh PC, Campbell MF, editors. Campbell’s urology. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders; 1998. p. 2283–2326.
3.
Escudier B et al. Renal cell carcinoma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2012;23 Suppl 7:vii65–71.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Fujii Y et al. Incidence of benign pathologic lesions at partial nephrectomy for presumed RCC renal masses: Japanese dual-center experience with 176 consecutive patients. Urology. 2008;72(3):598–602.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Kutikov A et al. Incidence of benign pathologic findings at partial nephrectomy for solitary renal mass presumed to be renal cell carcinoma on preoperative imaging. Urology. 2006;68(4):737–40.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Delahunt B, Bethwaite PB, Nacey JN. Outcome prediction for renal cell carcinoma: evaluation of prognostic factors for tumours divided according to histological subtype. Pathology. 2007;39(5):459–65.CrossRefPubMed
7.
8.
Hirsch MS, Signoretti S, Dal Cin P. Adult renal cell carcinoma: a review of established entities from morphology to molecular genetics. Surg Pathol Clin. 2015;8(4):587–621.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Przybycin CG, Magi-Galluzzi C, McKenney JK. Hereditary syndromes with associated renal neoplasia: a practical guide to histologic recognition in renal tumor resection specimens. Adv Anat Pathol. 2013;20(4):245–63.CrossRefPubMed
10.
IARC. WHO classification of tumours of the urinary system and male genital organs. 4 ed. vol. 8. Geneva: International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2016.
11.•
Su D, Singer EA, Srinivasan R. Molecular pathways in renal cell carcinoma: recent advances in genetics and molecular biology. Curr Opin Oncol. 2015;27(3):217–23. This article highlights the molecular biology of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) with the goal of uncovering unique molecular signatures associated with distinct subtypes of RCC. A more precise molecular classification of RCC could lead to mechanism-based therapeutics.
12.
Pedrosa I et al. MR classification of renal masses with pathologic correlation. Eur Radiol. 2008;18(2):365–75.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Soyer P et al. Renal cell carcinoma of clear type: correlation of CT features with tumor size, architectural patterns, and pathologic staging. Eur Radiol. 1997;7(2):224–9.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Yoshimitsu K et al. MR imaging of renal cell carcinoma: its role in determining cell type. Radiat Med. 2004;22(6):371–6.PubMed
15.
Kim JK et al. Differentiation of subtypes of renal cell carcinoma on helical CT scans. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;178(6):1499–506.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Jinzaki M et al. Double-phase helical CT of small renal parenchymal neoplasms: correlation with pathologic findings and tumor angiogenesis. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2000;24(6):835–42.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Young JR et al. Clear cell renal cell carcinoma: discrimination from other renal cell carcinoma subtypes and oncocytoma at multiphasic multidetector CT. Radiology. 2013;267(2):444–53.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Herts BR et al. Enhancement characteristics of papillary renal neoplasms revealed on triphasic helical CT of the kidneys. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;178(2):367–72.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Sheir KZ et al. Differentiation of renal cell carcinoma subtypes by multislice computerized tomography. J Urol. 2005;174(2):451–5. discussion 455.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Zhang J et al. Solid renal cortical tumors: differentiation with CT. Radiology. 2007;244(2):494–504.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Strotzer M, Lehner KB, Becker K. Detection of fat in a renal cell carcinoma mimicking angiomyolipoma. Radiology. 1993;188(2):427–8.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Helenon O et al. Renal cell carcinoma containing fat: demonstration with CT. Radiology. 1993;188(2):429–30.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Castoldi MC et al. CT demonstration of liquid intratumoral fat layering in a necrotic renal cell carcinoma. Abdom Imaging. 1995;20(5):483–5.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Lesavre A et al. CT of papillary renal cell carcinomas with cholesterol necrosis mimicking angiomyolipomas. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003;181(1):143–5.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Schuster TG et al. Papillary renal cell carcinoma containing fat without calcification mimicking angiomyolipoma on CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004;183(5):1402–4.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Roy C et al. MR Imaging of papillary renal neoplasms: potential application for characterization of small renal masses. Eur Radiol. 2007;17(1):193–200.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Pedrosa I et al. MR imaging of renal masses: correlation with findings at surgery and pathologic analysis. Radiographics. 2008;28(4):985–1003.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Outwater EK et al. Lipid in renal clear cell carcinoma: detection on opposed-phase gradient-echo MR images. Radiology. 1997;205(1):103–7.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Hindman N et al. Angiomyolipoma with minimal fat: can it be differentiated from clear cell renal cell carcinoma by using standard MR techniques? Radiology. 2012;265(2):468–77.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
31.
Vargas HA et al. Renal cortical tumors: use of multiphasic contrast-enhanced MR imaging to differentiate benign and malignant histologic subtypes. Radiology. 2012;264(3):779–88.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Sun MR et al. Renal cell carcinoma: dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging for differentiation of tumor subtypes—correlation with pathologic findings. Radiology. 2009;250(3):793–802.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Taouli B et al. Renal lesions: characterization with diffusion-weighted imaging versus contrast-enhanced MR imaging. Radiology. 2009;251(2):398–407.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Wang H et al. Renal cell carcinoma: diffusion-weighted MR imaging for subtype differentiation at 3.0 T. Radiology. 2010;257(1):135–43.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Goyal A et al. Diffusion-weighted MRI in renal cell carcinoma: a surrogate marker for predicting nuclear grade and histological subtype. Acta Radiol. 2012;53(3):349–58.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Rosenkrantz AB et al. Utility of the apparent diffusion coefficient for distinguishing clear cell renal cell carcinoma of low and high nuclear grade. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195(5):W344–51.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Srigley JR et al. The International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Vancouver Classification of Renal Neoplasia. Am J Surg Pathol. 2013;37(10):1469–89.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Zucchi A et al. Prognostic factors in a large multi-institutional series of papillary renal cell carcinoma. BJU Int. 2012;109(8):1140–6.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Amin MB et al. Prognostic impact of histologic subtyping of adult renal epithelial neoplasms: an experience of 405 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 2002;26(3):281–91.CrossRefPubMed
40.
Ruppert-Kohlmayr AJ et al. Differentiation of renal clear cell carcinoma and renal papillary carcinoma using quantitative CT enhancement parameters. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004;183(5):1387–91.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Lopez-Beltran A et al. 2004 WHO classification of the renal tumors of the adults. Eur Urol. 2006;49(5):798–805.CrossRefPubMed
42.
Egbert ND et al. Differentiation of papillary renal cell carcinoma subtypes on CT and MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;201(2):347–55.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Bertolotto M et al. Renal masses with equivocal enhancement at CT: characterization with contrast-enhanced ultrasound. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204(5):W557–65.CrossRefPubMed
44.
Kaza RK et al. Distinguishing enhancing from nonenhancing renal lesions with fast kilovoltage-switching dual-energy CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197(6):1375–81.CrossRefPubMed
45.
Mileto A et al. Accuracy of contrast-enhanced dual-energy MDCT for the assessment of iodine uptake in renal lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;202(5):W466–74.CrossRefPubMed
46.
Karlo CA et al. MR imaging of renal cortical tumours: qualitative and quantitative chemical shift imaging parameters. Eur Radiol. 2013;23(6):1738–44.CrossRefPubMed
47.
Sussman SK, Glickstein MF, Krzymowski GA. Hypointense renal cell carcinoma: MR imaging with pathologic correlation. Radiology. 1990;177(2):495–7.CrossRefPubMed
48.
Oliva MR et al. Renal cell carcinoma: t1 and t2 signal intensity characteristics of papillary and clear cell types correlated with pathology. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192(6):1524–30.CrossRefPubMed
49.
Silverman SG et al. Hyperattenuating renal masses: etiologies, pathogenesis, and imaging evaluation. Radiographics. 2007;27(4):1131–43.CrossRefPubMed
50.
Yamada T et al. Differentiation of pathologic subtypes of papillary renal cell carcinoma on CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;191(5):1559–63.CrossRefPubMed
51.
Volpe A et al. Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (RCC): oncological outcomes and prognostic factors in a large multicentre series. BJU Int. 2012;110(1):76–83.CrossRefPubMed
52.
Kato I, Iribe Y, Nagashima Y, et al. Fluorescent and chromogenic in situ hybridization of CEN17q as a potent useful diagnostic marker for Birt–Hogg–Dubé syndrome-associated chromophobe renal cell carcinomas. Hum Pathol. 2016. doi:10.​1016/​j.​humpath.​2016.​01.​004.
53.
Ng KL, Morais C, Bernard A, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of immunohistochemical biomarkers that differentiate chromophobe renal cell carcinoma from renal oncocytoma. J Clin Pathol. 2016. doi:10.​1136/​jclinpath-2015-203585.
54.
Rosenkrantz AB et al. MRI features of renal oncocytoma and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195(6):W421–7.CrossRefPubMed
55.
Hoffmann NE et al. Differences in organ system of distant metastasis by renal cell carcinoma subtype. J Urol. 2008;179(2):474–7.CrossRefPubMed
56.
Kobayashi N et al. Collecting duct carcinoma of the kidney: an immunohistochemical evaluation of the use of antibodies for differential diagnosis. Hum Pathol. 2008;39(9):1350–9.CrossRefPubMed
57.
Gonzalez-Roibon N et al. The role of GATA binding protein 3 in the differential diagnosis of collecting duct and upper tract urothelial carcinomas. Hum Pathol. 2013;44(12):2651–7.CrossRefPubMed
58.
Prasad SR et al. Neoplasms of the renal medulla: radiologic–pathologic correlation. Radiographics. 2005;25(2):369–80.CrossRefPubMed
59.
Pickhardt PJ et al. From the archives of the AFIP. Infiltrative renal lesions: radiologic–pathologic correlation. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology. Radiographics. 2000;20(1):215–43.CrossRefPubMed
60.
Gurel S et al. Subtypes of renal cell carcinoma: MRI and pathological features. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2013;19(4):304–11.PubMed
61.
Pickhardt PJ, Siegel CL, McLarney JK. Collecting duct carcinoma of the kidney: are imaging findings suggestive of the diagnosis? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001;176(3):627–33.CrossRefPubMed
62.
63.
Kuroda N et al. Review of renal oncocytoma with focus on clinical and pathobiological aspects. Histol Histopathol. 2003;18(3):935–42.PubMed
64.
Hes O et al. Renal oncocytoma with and without intravascular extension into the branches of renal vein have the same morphological, immunohistochemical and genetic features. Virchows Arch. 2008;452(3):285–93.CrossRefPubMed
65.
Davidson AJ et al. Renal oncocytoma and carcinoma: failure of differentiation with CT. Radiology. 1993;186(3):693–6.CrossRefPubMed
66.
Perez-Ordonez B et al. Renal oncocytoma: a clinicopathologic study of 70 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 1997;21(8):871–83.CrossRefPubMed
67.
Cochand-Priollet B et al. Renal chromophobe cell carcinoma and oncocytoma. A comparative morphologic, histochemical, and immunohistochemical study of 124 cases. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1997;121(10):1081–6.PubMed
68.
69.
Barth KH, Menon M. Renal oncocytoma. Further diagnostic observations. Diagn Imaging. 1980;49(5):259–65.PubMed
70.
Blake MA et al. Renal oncocytoma displaying intense activity on 18F-FDG PET. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;186(1):269–70.CrossRefPubMed
71.
Harmon WJ, King BF, Lieber MM. Renal oncocytoma: magnetic resonance imaging characteristics. J Urol. 1996;155(3):863–7.CrossRefPubMed
72.
Ball DS et al. Scar sign of renal oncocytoma: magnetic resonance imaging appearance and lack of specificity. Urol Radiol. 1986;8(1):46–8.CrossRefPubMed
73.
Pretorius ES et al. Renal neoplasms amenable to partial nephrectomy: MR imaging. Radiology. 1999;212(1):28–34.CrossRefPubMed
74.•
Lassel EA et al. Diffusion-weighted imaging of focal renal lesions: a meta-analysis. Eur Radiol. 2014;24(1):241–9. This article is a meta-analysis evaluating the value of DWI to contribute to differentiation of benign from malignant renal tumors.
75.
Choudhary S et al. Renal oncocytoma: CT features cannot reliably distinguish oncocytoma from other renal neoplasms. Clin Radiol. 2009;64(5):517–22.CrossRefPubMed
76.
Mehta V et al. Renal angiomyolipoma, fat-poor variant—a clinicopathologic mimicker of malignancy. Virchows Arch. 2013;463(1):41–6.CrossRefPubMed
77.
Brimo F et al. Renal epithelioid angiomyolipoma with atypia: a series of 40 cases with emphasis on clinicopathologic prognostic indicators of malignancy. Am J Surg Pathol. 2010;34(5):715–22.PubMed
78.
Bhatt JR, Richard PO, Kim NS, et al. Natural history of renal angiomyolipoma (AML): most patients with large AMLs >4cm can be offered active surveillance as an initial management strategy. Eur Urol. 2016. doi:10.​1016/​j.​eururo.​2016.​01.​048.
79.
80.
Bosniak MA et al. CT diagnosis of renal angiomyolipoma: the importance of detecting small amounts of fat. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1988;151(3):497–501.CrossRefPubMed
81.
Israel GM et al. The use of opposed-phase chemical shift MRI in the diagnosis of renal angiomyolipomas. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;184(6):1868–72.CrossRefPubMed
82.
Kim JK et al. Angiomyolipoma with minimal fat: differentiation from renal cell carcinoma at biphasic helical CT. Radiology. 2004;230(3):677–84.CrossRefPubMed
83.
Kim SH et al. Differentiation of clear cell renal cell carcinoma from other subtypes and fat-poor angiomyolipoma by use of quantitative enhancement measurement during three-phase MDCT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206(1):W21–8.CrossRefPubMed
84.
Choi HJ et al. Value of T2-weighted MR imaging in differentiating low-fat renal angiomyolipomas from other renal tumors. Acta Radiol. 2011;52(3):349–53.CrossRefPubMed
85.•
Cornelis F et al. Routinely performed multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging helps to differentiate common subtypes of renal tumours. Eur Radiol. 2014;24(5):1068–80. This article evaluated the ability of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging to differentiate the common subtypes of RCC and found high specificity in differentiating between papillary RCCs, oncocytomas, and chromophobe RCCs using wash-in and wash-out indices.
86.
Roupret M et al. European Association of Urology Guidelines on upper urinary tract urothelial cell carcinoma: 2015 update. Eur Urol. 2015;68(5):868–79.CrossRefPubMed
87.
Cosentino M et al. Upper urinary tract urothelial cell carcinoma: location as a predictive factor for concomitant bladder carcinoma. World J Urol. 2013;31(1):141–5.CrossRefPubMed
88.
Sobin LH, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C, editors. TNM classification of malignant tumours. 7 ed. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell; 2009. p. 336.
89.
90.
Carvalho JC et al. p63, CK7, PAX8 and INI-1: an optimal immunohistochemical panel to distinguish poorly differentiated urothelial cell carcinoma from high-grade tumours of the renal collecting system. Histopathology. 2012;60(4):597–608.CrossRefPubMed
91.
Albadine R et al. PAX8(+)/p63(−) immunostaining pattern in renal collecting duct carcinoma (CDC): a useful immunoprofile in the differential diagnosis of CDC versus urothelial carcinoma of upper urinary tract. Am J Surg Pathol. 2010;34(7):965–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
92.
Kawashima A, Glockner JF, King Jr BF. CT urography and MR urography. Radiol Clin N Am. 2003;41(5):945–61.CrossRefPubMed
93.
Browne RF et al. Transitional cell carcinoma of the upper urinary tract: spectrum of imaging findings. Radiographics. 2005;25(6):1609–27.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Correlating Preoperative Imaging with Histologic Subtypes of Renal Cell Carcinoma and Common Mimickers
Authors
Jennifer Gordetsky
Jessica Zarzour
Publication date
01-07-2016
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Current Urology Reports / Issue 7/2016
Print ISSN: 1527-2737
Electronic ISSN: 1534-6285
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11934-016-0606-2

Other articles of this Issue 7/2016

Current Urology Reports 7/2016 Go to the issue

New Imaging Techniques (A Rastinehad and S Rais-Bahrami, Section Editors)

Prostate Artery Embolization as a New Treatment for Benign Prostate Hyperplasia: Contemporary Status in 2016

Regenerative Medicine (A Atala, Section Editor)

In Vitro Spermatogenesis: How Far from Clinical Application?

Benign Prostatic Hyperlasia (K McVary, Section Editor)

Phytotherapy for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia (K McVary, Section Editor)

The Effect of LUTS/BPH and Treatments on Ejaculatory Function

Urothelial Cancer (A Sagalowsky, Section Editor)

Gastrointestinal Complications in Patients Who Undergo Radical Cystectomy with Enhanced Recovery Protocol