Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Diagnostic criteria for oncocytic renal neoplasms: a survey of urologic pathologists


Abstract

Renal oncocytoma and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (RCC) have been long recognized as distinct tumors; however, it remains unknown if uniform diagnostic criteria are used to distinguish these tumor types in practice. A survey was distributed to urologic pathologists regarding oncocytic tumors. Responses were received from 17/26 invitees. Histologically, >1 mitotic figure was regarded as most worrisome (n=10) or incompatible (n=6) with oncocytoma diagnosis. Interpretation of focal nuclear wrinkling, focal perinuclear clearing, and multinucleation depended on extent and did not necessarily exclude oncocytoma if minor. Staining techniques most commonly used included: CK7 (94%), KIT (71%), vimentin (65%), colloidal iron (59%), CD10 (53%), and AMACR (41%). Rare CK7-positive cells (≤5%) was regarded as most supportive of oncocytoma, although an extent excluding oncocytoma was not universal. Multiple chromosomal losses were most strongly supportive for chromophobe RCC diagnosis (65%). Less certainty was reported for chromosomal gain or a single loss. For tumors with mixed or inconclusive features, many participants use an intermediate diagnostic category (82%) that does not label the tumor as unequivocally benign or malignant, typically "oncocytic neoplasm" or "tumor" with comment. The term "hybrid tumor" was used variably in several scenarios. A slight majority (65%) report outright diagnosis of oncocytoma in needle biopsies. The morphologic, immunohistochemical, and genetic characteristics that define oncocytic renal tumors remain incompletely understood. Further studies correlating genetics, behavior, and histology are needed to define which tumors truly warrant classification as carcinomas for patient counseling and follow-up strategies.

Abstract

Renal oncocytoma and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (RCC) have been long recognized as distinct tumors; however, it remains unknown if uniform diagnostic criteria are used to distinguish these tumor types in practice. A survey was distributed to urologic pathologists regarding oncocytic tumors. Responses were received from 17/26 invitees. Histologically, >1 mitotic figure was regarded as most worrisome (n=10) or incompatible (n=6) with oncocytoma diagnosis. Interpretation of focal nuclear wrinkling, focal perinuclear clearing, and multinucleation depended on extent and did not necessarily exclude oncocytoma if minor. Staining techniques most commonly used included: CK7 (94%), KIT (71%), vimentin (65%), colloidal iron (59%), CD10 (53%), and AMACR (41%). Rare CK7-positive cells (≤5%) was regarded as most supportive of oncocytoma, although an extent excluding oncocytoma was not universal. Multiple chromosomal losses were most strongly supportive for chromophobe RCC diagnosis (65%). Less certainty was reported for chromosomal gain or a single loss. For tumors with mixed or inconclusive features, many participants use an intermediate diagnostic category (82%) that does not label the tumor as unequivocally benign or malignant, typically "oncocytic neoplasm" or "tumor" with comment. The term "hybrid tumor" was used variably in several scenarios. A slight majority (65%) report outright diagnosis of oncocytoma in needle biopsies. The morphologic, immunohistochemical, and genetic characteristics that define oncocytic renal tumors remain incompletely understood. Further studies correlating genetics, behavior, and histology are needed to define which tumors truly warrant classification as carcinomas for patient counseling and follow-up strategies.

Statistics

Altmetrics

Downloads

1 download since deposited on 17 May 2017
1 download since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Institute of Pathology and Molecular Pathology
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:14 March 2017
Deposited On:17 May 2017 07:42
Last Modified:04 Jun 2017 18:53
Publisher:Elsevier
ISSN:0046-8177
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2017.03.004
PubMed ID:28315424

Download

Preview Icon on Download
Content: Published Version
Filetype: PDF - Registered users only
Size: 1MB
View at publisher

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations