Jie Gao1, Qinfeng Xu2, Yao Fu3, Kuiqiang He1, Chengwei Zhang1, Qing Zhang1, Jiong Shi3, Xiaozhi Zhao4, Feng Wang5, Hongqian Guo6. 1. Department of Urology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Institute of Urology Nanjing University, The Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, No. 321 Zhongshan Road, Nanjing, 210008, Jiangsu Province, China. 2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China. 3. Department of Pathology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, The Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China. 4. Department of Urology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Institute of Urology Nanjing University, The Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, No. 321 Zhongshan Road, Nanjing, 210008, Jiangsu Province, China. zhaoxz@nju.edu.cn. 5. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China. fengwangcn@hotmail.com. 6. Department of Urology, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, Institute of Urology Nanjing University, The Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, No. 321 Zhongshan Road, Nanjing, 210008, Jiangsu Province, China. dr.ghq@nju.edu.cn.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate parameters derived from 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT images for discriminating pathological characteristics in primary clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). METHODS: The study retrospectively examined data for 36 ccRCC patients with preoperative 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT scan and surgical specimens. Radiological parameters including maximal tumor diameter, mean CT value, and maximal standard uptake value (SUVmax) were derived from PET/CT images. Pathological characteristics included WHO/ISUP grade and adverse pathology (tumor necrosis or sarcomatoid or rhabdoid feature). Values of radiological parameters were compared within subgroups of pathological characteristics. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used for the effectiveness of radiological parameters in differentiating pathological characteristics, estimating area under the ROC curve (AUC) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: The WHO/ISUP grade distribution for 36 tumors was grade 1, 9 (25.0%); grade 2, 12 (33.3%); grade 3, 9 (25.0%); and grade 4, 6 (16.7%). Adverse pathology was positive for 15 (41.7%). Radiological tumor diameter and SUVmax significantly differed by WHO/ISUP grade, pT stage, and adverse pathology (all P < 0.05), with no difference by CT value. Tumor diameter demonstrated sensitivity 86% and specificity 88% for pT stage, with cutoff 6.70 and AUC 0.91 (95% CI, 0.79-1.00, P < 0.001). SUVmax could effectively differentiate WHO/ISUP grade (3-4 vs. 1-2) and adverse pathology (positive vs. negative), with AUC 0.89 (95% CI, 0.81-0.98, P < 0.001), cutoff 16.4, sensitivity 100%, and specificity 71% and AUC 0.92 (95% CI, 0.85-0.99, P < 0.001), cutoff 18.5, sensitivity 94%, and specificity 87%, respectively. CONCLUSION: 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT could effectively identify aggressive pathological features of ccRCC.
PURPOSE: To evaluate parameters derived from 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT images for discriminating pathological characteristics in primary clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC). METHODS: The study retrospectively examined data for 36 ccRCC patients with preoperative 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT scan and surgical specimens. Radiological parameters including maximal tumor diameter, mean CT value, and maximal standard uptake value (SUVmax) were derived from PET/CT images. Pathological characteristics included WHO/ISUP grade and adverse pathology (tumor necrosis or sarcomatoid or rhabdoid feature). Values of radiological parameters were compared within subgroups of pathological characteristics. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used for the effectiveness of radiological parameters in differentiating pathological characteristics, estimating area under the ROC curve (AUC) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: The WHO/ISUP grade distribution for 36 tumors was grade 1, 9 (25.0%); grade 2, 12 (33.3%); grade 3, 9 (25.0%); and grade 4, 6 (16.7%). Adverse pathology was positive for 15 (41.7%). Radiological tumor diameter and SUVmax significantly differed by WHO/ISUP grade, pT stage, and adverse pathology (all P < 0.05), with no difference by CT value. Tumor diameter demonstrated sensitivity 86% and specificity 88% for pT stage, with cutoff 6.70 and AUC 0.91 (95% CI, 0.79-1.00, P < 0.001). SUVmax could effectively differentiate WHO/ISUP grade (3-4 vs. 1-2) and adverse pathology (positive vs. negative), with AUC 0.89 (95% CI, 0.81-0.98, P < 0.001), cutoff 16.4, sensitivity 100%, and specificity 71% and AUC 0.92 (95% CI, 0.85-0.99, P < 0.001), cutoff 18.5, sensitivity 94%, and specificity 87%, respectively. CONCLUSION: 68Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT could effectively identify aggressive pathological features of ccRCC.
Authors: M de Peralta-Venturina; H Moch; M Amin; P Tamboli; S Hailemariam; M Mihatsch; J Javidan; H Stricker; J Y Ro; M B Amin Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2001-03 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: Shomik Sengupta; Christine M Lohse; Bradley C Leibovich; Igor Frank; R Houston Thompson; W Scott Webster; Horst Zincke; Michael L Blute; John C Cheville; Eugene D Kwon Journal: Cancer Date: 2005-08-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Kirk A Keegan; Clayton W Schupp; Karim Chamie; Nicholas J Hellenthal; Christopher P Evans; Theresa M Koppie Journal: J Urol Date: 2012-06-13 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Matthew D Katz; Maria F Serrano; Robert L Grubb; Ted A Skolarus; Feng Gao; Peter A Humphrey; Adam S Kibel Journal: J Urol Date: 2010-01-18 Impact factor: 7.450
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: Li-Yan Khor; Hari P Dhakal; Xuefei Jia; Jordan P Reynolds; Jesse K McKenney; Brian I Rini; Cristina Magi-Galluzzi; Christopher G Przybycin Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2016-09 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: Falk Gühne; Philipp Seifert; Bernhard Theis; Matthias Steinert; Martin Freesmeyer; Robert Drescher Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) Date: 2021-06-23