Andreas M Hötker1,2, Yousef Mazaheri3, Andreas Wibmer1, Junting Zheng4, Chaya S Moskowitz4, Satish K Tickoo5, Paul Russo6, Hedvig Hricak1, Oguz Akin1. 1. 1 Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY 10065. 2. 2 Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Universitätsmedizin Mainz, Mainz, Germany. 3. 3 Department of Medical Physics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY. 4. 4 Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY. 5. 5 Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY. 6. 6 Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to differentiate clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) from other common renal cortical tumors by use of DWI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included 117 patients (mean age, 60 years) with 122 histopathologically confirmed renal cortical tumors who underwent 1.5-T MRI that included DWI before they underwent nephrectomy between 2006 and 2013. For each tumor, two radiologists independently evaluated apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values on the basis of a single ROI in a nonnecrotic area of the tumor and also by assessment of the whole tumor. The concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) was calculated to assess interreader agreement. The mean ADC values of clear cell RCC and every other tumor subtype were compared using an exact Wilcoxon rank sum test. RESULTS: Interreader agreement was excellent and higher in whole-tumor assessment (CCC, 0.982) than in single-ROI analysis (CCC, 0.756). For both readers, ADC values for clear cell RCC found on single-ROI assessment (2.19 and 2.08 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) and whole-tumor assessment (2.30 and 2.32 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) were statistically significantly higher than those for chromophobe, papillary, or unclassified RCC (p < 0.05) but were similar to those for oncocytoma found on single-ROI assessment (2.14 and 2.32 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) and whole-tumor assessment (2.38 and 2.24 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s). ADC values were also higher for clear cell RCC than for angiomyolipoma, but the difference was statistically significant only in whole-tumor assessment (p < 0.03). CONCLUSION: ADC values were statistically significantly higher for clear cell RCC than for chromophobe, papillary, or unclassified RCC subtypes; however, differentiating clear cell RCC from oncocytoma by use of DWI remains especially challenging, because similar ADC values have been shown for these two tumor types.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to differentiate clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) from other common renal cortical tumors by use of DWI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study included 117 patients (mean age, 60 years) with 122 histopathologically confirmed renal cortical tumors who underwent 1.5-T MRI that included DWI before they underwent nephrectomy between 2006 and 2013. For each tumor, two radiologists independently evaluated apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values on the basis of a single ROI in a nonnecrotic area of the tumor and also by assessment of the whole tumor. The concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) was calculated to assess interreader agreement. The mean ADC values of clear cell RCC and every other tumor subtype were compared using an exact Wilcoxon rank sum test. RESULTS: Interreader agreement was excellent and higher in whole-tumor assessment (CCC, 0.982) than in single-ROI analysis (CCC, 0.756). For both readers, ADC values for clear cell RCC found on single-ROI assessment (2.19 and 2.08 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) and whole-tumor assessment (2.30 and 2.32 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) were statistically significantly higher than those for chromophobe, papillary, or unclassified RCC (p < 0.05) but were similar to those for oncocytoma found on single-ROI assessment (2.14 and 2.32 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s) and whole-tumor assessment (2.38 and 2.24 × 10(-3) mm(2)/s). ADC values were also higher for clear cell RCC than for angiomyolipoma, but the difference was statistically significant only in whole-tumor assessment (p < 0.03). CONCLUSION: ADC values were statistically significantly higher for clear cell RCC than for chromophobe, papillary, or unclassified RCC subtypes; however, differentiating clear cell RCC from oncocytoma by use of DWI remains especially challenging, because similar ADC values have been shown for these two tumor types.
Authors: Bradley C Leibovich; Christine M Lohse; Paul L Crispen; Stephen A Boorjian; R Houston Thompson; Michael L Blute; John C Cheville Journal: J Urol Date: 2010-02-19 Impact factor: 7.450
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: S Rheinheimer; B Stieltjes; F Schneider; D Simon; S Pahernik; H U Kauczor; P Hallscheidt Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2011-11-21 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Hersh Chandarana; Stella K Kang; Samson Wong; Henry Rusinek; Jeff L Zhang; Shigeki Arizono; William C Huang; Jonathan Melamed; James S Babb; Edgar F Suan; Vivian S Lee; Eric E Sigmund Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 6.016
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: B Paudyal; P Paudyal; Y Tsushima; N Oriuchi; M Amanuma; M Miyazaki; A Taketomi-Takahashi; Y Nakazato; K Endo Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2009-07-20 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Stephen D W Beck; Manish I Patel; Mark E Snyder; Michael W Kattan; Robert J Motzer; Victor E Reuter; Paul Russo Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Saadia A Aziz; Joshua Sznol; Adebowale Adeniran; John W Colberg; Robert L Camp; Harriet M Kluger Journal: J Transl Med Date: 2013-01-14 Impact factor: 5.531
Authors: Massimo Galia; Domenico Albano; Alberto Bruno; Antonino Agrusa; Giorgio Romano; Giuseppe Di Buono; Francesco Agnello; Giuseppe Salvaggio; Ludovico La Grutta; Massimo Midiri; Roberto Lagalla Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2017-07-13 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Yulian Mytsyk; Serhiy Pasichnyk; Ihor Dutka; Ihor Dats; Dmytro Vorobets; Michał Skrzypczyk; Yerzhan Uteuliyev; Andrea Botikova; Katarina Gazdikova; Peter Kubatka; Peter Urdzik; Peter Kruzliak Journal: Clin Exp Med Date: 2020-02-05 Impact factor: 3.984
Authors: Chiara Pozzessere; Maria Bassanelli; Anna Ceribelli; Sazan Rasul; Shuren Li; John O Prior; Francesco Cicone Journal: Curr Urol Rep Date: 2019-10-11 Impact factor: 3.092
Authors: Anna K Paschall; S Mojdeh Mirmomen; Rolf Symons; Amir Pourmorteza; Rabindra Gautam; Amil Sahai; Andrew J Dwyer; Maria J Merino; Adam R Metwalli; W Marston Linehan; Ashkan A Malayeri Journal: Abdom Radiol (NY) Date: 2018-09
Authors: Robert S Lim; Matthew D F McInnes; Mahadevaswamy Siddaiah; Trevor A Flood; Luke T Lavallee; Nicola Schieda Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2018-02-28 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Faraz Farhadi; Moozhan Nikpanah; Anna K Paschall; Ahmad Shafiei; Ashkan Tadayoni; Mark W Ball; W Marston Linehan; Elizabeth C Jones; Ashkan A Malayeri Journal: Radiology Date: 2020-04-07 Impact factor: 11.105