OBJECTIVE: To assess preoperative renal tumor biopsy (RTB) accuracy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: As part of the prospective NEPHRON study, data from 1,237 renal tumors were collected, including the use and results of RTB and final histology following nephrectomy. During the 6 months period of inclusion, 130 preoperative biopsies were performed. We used the kappa coefficient of the McNemar test to determine the concordance between the biopsy and the nephrectomy specimen (NS) regarding four parameters: malignant/benign status, histological subtype, Fuhrman grade and microscopic necrosis. RESULTS: Preoperative biopsies were performed in 9.7 and 11.4 % of the 667 radical and 570 partial nephrectomies, respectively. Tumor biopsy was inconclusive in 7.7 % of the cases. In 117 cases, a comparison between RTB and NS was available. Benign tumors accounted for three (2.6 %) and five (4.3 %) of the RTB and NS, respectively (κ = 0.769, good). With seven (6 %) discordant results in terms of histological subtype characterization between RTB and final pathology, RTB accuracy was considered excellent (κ = 0.882). In 33 cases (31.7 %), Fuhrman grade was underestimated at biopsy resulting in an intermediate concordance level (κ = 0.498). Tumor microscopic necrosis was identified in 12 RTB (10.4 %) versus 33 NS (28.4 %) (κ = 0.357, poor). CONCLUSIONS: RTB provides good to excellent diagnostic performance for discriminating malignancy and tumor histological subtype. However, its performance is intermediate or even poor when considering prognostic criteria like Fuhrman grade or microscopic necrosis. Thus, this possible inaccuracy should be taken into consideration when using RTB for accurate guidance of treatment strategy.
OBJECTIVE: To assess preoperative renal tumor biopsy (RTB) accuracy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: As part of the prospective NEPHRON study, data from 1,237 renal tumors were collected, including the use and results of RTB and final histology following nephrectomy. During the 6 months period of inclusion, 130 preoperative biopsies were performed. We used the kappa coefficient of the McNemar test to determine the concordance between the biopsy and the nephrectomy specimen (NS) regarding four parameters: malignant/benign status, histological subtype, Fuhrman grade and microscopic necrosis. RESULTS: Preoperative biopsies were performed in 9.7 and 11.4 % of the 667 radical and 570 partial nephrectomies, respectively. Tumor biopsy was inconclusive in 7.7 % of the cases. In 117 cases, a comparison between RTB and NS was available. Benign tumors accounted for three (2.6 %) and five (4.3 %) of the RTB and NS, respectively (κ = 0.769, good). With seven (6 %) discordant results in terms of histological subtype characterization between RTB and final pathology, RTB accuracy was considered excellent (κ = 0.882). In 33 cases (31.7 %), Fuhrman grade was underestimated at biopsy resulting in an intermediate concordance level (κ = 0.498). Tumor microscopic necrosis was identified in 12 RTB (10.4 %) versus 33 NS (28.4 %) (κ = 0.357, poor). CONCLUSIONS: RTB provides good to excellent diagnostic performance for discriminating malignancy and tumor histological subtype. However, its performance is intermediate or even poor when considering prognostic criteria like Fuhrman grade or microscopic necrosis. Thus, this possible inaccuracy should be taken into consideration when using RTB for accurate guidance of treatment strategy.
Authors: Michael J Leveridge; Antonio Finelli; John R Kachura; Andrew Evans; Hannah Chung; Daniel A Shiff; Kimberly Fernandes; Michael A S Jewett Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2011-06-24 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: John M Hollingsworth; David C Miller; Stephanie Daignault; Brent K Hollenbeck Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2006-09-20 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Brett Delahunt; Jesse K McKenney; Christine M Lohse; Bradley C Leibovich; Robert Houston Thompson; Stephen A Boorjian; John C Cheville Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2013-03 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: Alessandro Volpe; Kamal Mattar; Antonio Finelli; John R Kachura; Andrew J Evans; William R Geddie; Michael A S Jewett Journal: J Urol Date: 2008-10-18 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Shuyu Tang; Maxwell V Meng; James B Slater; Jeremy W Gordon; Daniel B Vigneron; Bradley A Stohr; Peder E Z Larson; Zhen Jane Wang Journal: Cancer Date: 2021-04-12 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Pierre Bigot; Jean-Christophe Bernhard; Vincent Flamand; Inderbir Gill; Grégory Verhoest; Jean Baptiste Beauval; François Xavier Nouhaud; Evren Suer; Guillaume Ploussard; Jean François Hetet; Jérôme Rigaud; Eduard Baco; Stéphane Larré; Philippe Sebe; Nicolas Koutlidis; Aurélien Descazeaud; Masatoshi Eto; Arnaud Doerfler; Morgan Roupret; Nam Son Vuong; Boris Reix; Toru Matsugasumi; Adnan El Bakri; Laurence Albiges; Michel Soulié; Jean-Jacques Patard; Arnaud Méjean; Karim Bensalah Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2016-09-28 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Renuka Sriram; Jeremy Gordon; Celine Baligand; Fayyaz Ahamed; Justin Delos Santos; Hecong Qin; Robert A Bok; Daniel B Vigneron; John Kurhanewicz; Peder E Z Larson; Zhen J Wang Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2018-09-05 Impact factor: 6.639