Literature DB >> 35371954

Role of computed tomography features in the differential diagnosis of chromophobe renal cell carcinoma from oncocytoma and angiomyolipoma without visible fat.

Cuiping Zhou1, Xiaohua Ban2, Jianxun Lv1, Lin Cheng1, Jianmin Xu3, Xinping Shen1.   

Abstract

Background: Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (chRCC) is often confused with oncocytoma and angiomyolipoma without visible fat (AML.wovf). The aim of this study was to determine computed tomography (CT) features predictive of chRCC to distinguish it from oncocytoma and AML.wovf.
Methods: This multicenter study enrolled 38 patients with chRCC, 32 with oncocytoma, and 43 with AML.wovf of the kidney. The clinical and imaging features of all cases were reviewed retrospectively, and associations between the features and histopathology were analyzed using univariate analysis, followed by multinomial logistic regression analysis. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to evaluate logistic regression models and determine optimal cut-off values for numeric data.
Results: Univariate analysis revealed significant differences between chRCC and oncocytoma in tumor ratios of lesion to renal cortex net enhancement (RLRCNE) on both corticomedullary and nephrographic phase images (P<0.001 for both) and calcification (P=0.035). On multinomial logistic regression analysis, only corticomedullary RLRCNE remained an independent predictor for the differential diagnosis of chRCC from oncocytoma (P<0.001), with an optimal cut-off value of 0.53. Comparing chRCC and AML.wovf, univariate analysis revealed significant differences in age (P=0.003), segmental enhancement inversion (SEI) (P=0.006), corticomedullary RLRCNE (P<0.001), unenhanced ratio of lesion to renal cortex attenuation (RLRCA; P<0.001), size (P<0.001), enhancement pattern over time (P=0.017), angle (P=0.014), and central scar (P<0.001). Only unenhanced RLRCA (P<0.001), size (P=0.003), and enhancement pattern over time (P=0.002) remained as independent predictors on multinomial logistic regression analysis, with optimal cut-off values of 1.13 and 30.9 mm for RLRCA and size, respectively. On ROC curve analysis of the logistic regression models, the areas under curve (AUC) were 0.888 and 0.963 for chRCC versus oncocytoma and AML.wovf, respectively. Conclusions: Corticomedullary RLRCNE on CT images was an independent predictor for the differential diagnosis of chRCC from oncocytoma. Unenhanced RLRCA, size, and enhancement pattern over time on CT had predictive value for discriminating chRCC from AML.wovf. 2022 Quantitative Imaging in Medicine and Surgery. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (chRCC); angiomyolipoma without visible fat (AML.wovf); computed tomography (CT); diagnosis; oncocytoma; predictive features

Year:  2022        PMID: 35371954      PMCID: PMC8923866          DOI: 10.21037/qims-21-734

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg        ISSN: 2223-4306


  23 in total

Review 1.  Renal angiomyolipoma without visible fat: Can we make the diagnosis using CT and MRI?

Authors:  Robert S Lim; Trevor A Flood; Matthew D F McInnes; Luke T Lavallee; Nicola Schieda
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-08-04       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 2.  Understanding pathologic variants of renal cell carcinoma: distilling therapeutic opportunities from biologic complexity.

Authors:  Brian Shuch; Ali Amin; Andrew J Armstrong; John N Eble; Vincenzo Ficarra; Antonio Lopez-Beltran; Guido Martignoni; Brian I Rini; Alexander Kutikov
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2014-05-21       Impact factor: 20.096

3.  The human chromophobe cell renal carcinoma: its probable relation to intercalated cells of the collecting duct.

Authors:  S Störkel; P V Steart; D Drenckhahn; W Thoenes
Journal:  Virchows Arch B Cell Pathol Incl Mol Pathol       Date:  1989

Review 4.  Diagnostic accuracy of segmental enhancement inversion for diagnosis of renal oncocytoma at biphasic contrast enhanced CT: systematic review.

Authors:  Nicola Schieda; Matthew D F McInnes; Lilly Cao
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-03-26       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Findings of Fat-Poor Angiomyolipomas.

Authors:  Aaron M Potretzke; Theodora A Potretzke; Tyler M Bauman; B Alexander Knight; Alyssa M Park; Jonathan M Mobley; Robert Sherburne Figenshau; Cary Lynn Siegel
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2017-01-03       Impact factor: 2.942

Review 6.  Ten uncommon and unusual variants of renal angiomyolipoma (AML): radiologic-pathologic correlation.

Authors:  N Schieda; A Z Kielar; O Al Dandan; M D F McInnes; T A Flood
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  2014-11-15       Impact factor: 2.350

7.  Clear cell renal cell carcinoma: discrimination from other renal cell carcinoma subtypes and oncocytoma at multiphasic multidetector CT.

Authors:  Jonathan R Young; Daniel Margolis; Steven Sauk; Allan J Pantuck; James Sayre; Steven S Raman
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2013-02-04       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma: multiphase MDCT enhancement patterns and morphologic features.

Authors:  Siva P Raman; Pamela T Johnson; Mohamad E Allaf; George Netto; Elliot K Fishman
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.959

9.  Differentiation of Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma From Other Subtypes and Fat-Poor Angiomyolipoma by Use of Quantitative Enhancement Measurement During Three-Phase MDCT.

Authors:  See Hyung Kim; Chan Sun Kim; Mi Jeong Kim; Jeong Yeon Cho; Seung Hyun Cho
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 3.959

10.  Imaging spectrum of renal oncocytomas: a pictorial review with pathologic correlation.

Authors:  Kousei Ishigami; Aaron R Jones; Laila Dahmoush; Leandro V Leite; Marius G Pakalniskis; Thomas J Barloon
Journal:  Insights Imaging       Date:  2014-12-14
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.