The chromophobe tumor grading system is the preferred grading scheme for chromophobe renal cell carcinoma

External validation of a four-tiered grading system for chromophobe renal cell carcinoma

This study aimed to validate the prognostic value of a four-tiered grading system recently proposed by Avulova et al. and to explore the prognostic ability of another four-tiered classification grading system in which there is a separate Grade 3 for tumor necrosis. Grading of chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (ChRCC) by the Fuhrman system is not feasible because of the inherent nuclear atypia in ChRCC. We collected relevant data of 263 patients with ChRCC who had undergone surgery in our hospital from 2008 to 2020. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to calculate the survival rate and Cox proportional hazard regression models to assess associations with cancer-specific survival and distant metastasis-free survival by hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Ten patients died from ChRCC, and 12 developed metastases. The 5 year CSS rates were 95.9%. Grades 2 (HR = 10.9; CI 1.11-106.4; P = 0.04), 3 (HR = 33.6, CI 3.32-339.1; P = 0.003), and 4 (HR = 417.4, CI 35.0-4976.2; P < 0.001) in a four-tiered grading system were significantly associated with CSS in a multivariate setting. However, the difference in CSS between Grades 2 and 3 was not significant (HR = 2.14, 95% CI 0.43-10.63; P = 0.35). The HRs of the associations between an exploratory grading system that includes a separate Grade 3 for tumor necrosis and CSS were as follows: Grade 2, 10.2 (CI 1.06-97.9, P = 0.045); Grade 3, 11.4 (CI 1.18-109.6, P = 0.04); and Grade 4, 267.9 (CI 27.6-2603.3, P < 0.001). Similarly, Grades 2 and 3 did not differ significantly. The four-tiered grading system studied is useful for predicting death from ChRCC and metastasis. However, Grade 3 did not more accurately predict risk of death and metastasis than did Grade 2. This was also true for the novel exploratory grading system that classifies tumors with necrosis into a separate Grade 3.

Updates in Grading of Renal Cell Carcinomas Beyond Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma and Papillary Renal Cell Carcinoma

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends grading of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and papillary RCC using the WHO/International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade, which is primarily based on nuclear features. As the spectrum of RCC continues to evolve, with more recently described subtypes in the past decade, literature evidence on grading these subtypes is limited or not available for some tumor types. Herein, we outline a pragmatic approach to the topic of grading RCC, dividing the contemporarily described RCC subtypes into 7 categories based on the potential clinical applicability of grading as a useful prognostic parameter: (1) RCC subtypes that are reasonably validated and recommended for WHO/ISUP grading; (2) RCC subtypes where WHO/ISUP is not applicable; (3) RCC subtypes where WHO/ISUP grading is potentially clinically useful; (4) inherently aggressive RCC subtypes where histologic classification itself confers an aggressive biologic potential; (5) renal epithelial tumors where WHO/ISUP grading provides potentially misleading prognostic implication; (6) renal epithelial neoplasms where low WHO/ISUP grade features are a prerequisite for accurate histologic classification; and (7) renal epithelial neoplasms with no or limited data on grading or incomplete understanding of the biologic potential. Our aim in outlining this approach is 2-fold: (a) identify the gaps in understanding and application of grading in RCC subtypes so that researchers in the field may perform additional studies on the basis of which the important pathologic function of assignment of grade may be recommended to be performed as a meaningful exercise across a wider spectrum of RCC; and (b) to provide guidance in the interim to surgical pathologists in terms of providing clinically useful grading information in RCC based on currently available clinicopathologic information.

Differential Immunohistochemical and Molecular Profiling of Conventional and Aggressive Components of Chromophobe Renal Cell Carcinoma: Pitfalls for Diagnosis

Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (ChRCC) is a relatively rare subtype of RCC with a characteristic histologic appearance. Most ChRCC are slow growing, but sarcomatoid differentiation and metastases can occur, indicative of aggressive behavior and poor prognosis. Herein, we characterize ten ChRCC with aggressive components, defined as sarcomatoid change and/or metastasis. Immunohistochemistry and next-generation sequencing was performed on available formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue, with differential profiling of conventional and aggressive components. All ten cases showed a conventional component of renal tumor morphologically consistent with ChRCC: three had sarcomatoid change, four had metastases, and three had both sarcomatoid change and metastases. In the primary conventional components, a typical ChRCC IHC pattern (CK7+, CD117+ and CAIX-) was observed in 8/10 cases; 2 cases had rare CK7 staining. In the aggressive components, CD117 and/or CK7 was lost in 7/10 cases; 3 cases showed loss of both. Two of 10 cases showed significant CAIX staining in the aggressive component. All 7 cases that had molecular profiling performed showed characteristic chromosomal losses reported for ChRCC, though two cases showed additional complex copy number alterations in the aggressive component only. Recurrent TP53 mutations (TP53m) were also seen; however surprisingly, the conventional and aggressive components had no shared TP53m: a TP53m was private to aggressive components in 2 cases; to the conventional component in 1 case; and in 4 cases, components demonstrated different TP53m. Of the 21 pathogenic alterations identified in 7 tumors, only a PTEN splicing alteration was shared between both components in one case. In conclusion, ChRCC can have IHC staining patterns and molecular profile that differ between conventional and aggressive components. Interpretation of stains on metastases or small biopsies to determine histologic subtype can be misleading. The lack of shared pathogenic mutations between the two components supports a model in which aggressive ChRCC can have convergent subclones with different TP53m.

Application and comparison of Fuhrman nuclear grading system with the novel tumor grading system for chromophobe renal cell carcinoma and its correlation with disease-specific events

Introduction

The grading system of chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (ChRCC) is not well established. In this study, we aimed to compare the application of Fuhrman nuclear grade (FNG) with the novel chromophobe tumor grade (CTG). We also evaluated the correlation of these two grading systems with the clinical outcome.

Materials and Methods

Consecutive cases of ChRCC diagnosed on nephrectomy during 2005-2014 were identified. The clinical details of the patients were retrieved. Histopathology slides were reviewed and the nuclear grading was assigned using standard FNG and the CTG system. The CTG and FNG gradings were correlated with clinical outcome.

Results

A total of 80 cases were retrieved. Distribution of FNG was as follows: FNG-1, 1 (1.3%); FNG-2, 23 (28.3%); FNG-3, 44 (55.0%); and FNG-4, 12 (15%). CTG distribution was as follows: CTG-1, 48 (60.0%); CTG-2, 20 (25.0%); and CTG-3 12 (15.0%). Follow-up data was available in 46 cases; the median follow-up was 23.9 months (range 1-96.4 months). The median time to recurrence/metastasis was 17.2 months (range 3.2-31.2 months). Mean disease-free survival (DFS) was 68.5 months. Both CTG (P < 0.001) and FNG (P = 0.001) correlated with DFS; however, only CTG retained this significance when only the nonsarcomatous cases were analyzed. On receiver operating characteristics curve analysis, CTG had higher predictive accuracy for DFS for the entire group, while FNG lost the statistical significance when the nonsarcomatous cases were analyzed. CTG (P = 0.001) but not FNG (P = 0.106) correlated with the disease-specific adverse events in non-sarcomatous cases.

Conclusions

It is possible to apply CTG in ChRCC. It is a better predictor of DFS and disease-specific adverse events. CTG is more appropriate and applicable than the FNG in grading ChRCC.

Loss of CDKN1A mRNA and Protein Expression Are Independent Predictors of Poor Outcome in Chromophobe Renal Cell Carcinoma Patients

Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (chRCC) patients have good prognosis. Only 5%-10% patients die of metastatic disease after tumorectomy, but tumor progression cannot be predicted by histopathological parameters alone. chRCC are characterized by losses of many chromosomes, whereas gene mutations are rare. In this study, we aim at identifying genes indicating chRCC progression. A bioinformatic approach was used to correlate chromosomal loss and mRNA expression from 15287 genes from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database. All genes in TCGA chromophobe renal cancer dataset (KICH) for which a significant correlation between chromosomal loss and mRNA expression was shown, were identified and their associations with outcome was assessed. Genome-wide DNA copy-number alterations were analyzed by Affymetrix OncoScan^® CNV FFPE Microarrays in a second cohort of Swiss chRCC. In both cohorts, tumors with loss of chromosomes 2, 6, 10, 13, 17 and 21 had signs of tumor progression. There were 4654 genes located on these chromosomes, and 13 of these genes had reduced mRNA levels, which was associated with poor outcome in chRCC. Decreased CDKN1A expression at mRNA (p = 0.02) and protein levels (p = 0.02) were associated with short overall survival and were independent predictors of prognosis (p <0.01 and <0.05 respectively). CDKN1A expression status is a prognostic biomarker independent of tumor stage. CDKN1A immunohistochemistry may be used to identify chRCC patients at greater risk of disease progression.

Compare Fuhrman Nuclear and Chromophobe Tumor Grade on Chromophobe RCC

Background

Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (chRCC) has a favorable prognosis. Due to irregular nuclei and nuclear pleomorphism, chRCC has a high Fuhrman nuclear grade (FNG). The chromophobe tumor grade (CTG) is a novel three-tier grading system that has been reported to be a better prognosticator than the traditional FNG. We compared the two nuclear grading systems in terms of patients’ clinical outcomes.

Patients and Method

We performed this retrospective chart review of all patients with chRCC from 2000 to 2017. All pathologic features and CTG and FNG results were re-evaluated.

Result

Eighteen patients’ records were reviewed with a mean follow-up of 70.6 months. The nuclear grading distribution was as follows: FNG 2, 56%; FNG 3, 39%; FNG 4, 5%; CTG 1, 78%; CTG 2, 17%; and CTG 3, 6%. Only one patient died. This patient had adrenal invasion, lung metastasis, sarcomatoid change and tumor necrosis, and the tumor was graded as FNG 4 and CTG 3. Overall survival was associated with both FNG and CTG.

Conclusion

Chromophobe RCC was associated with a low rate of cancer-specific death and sarcomatoid differentiation. Both FNG and CTG were associated with overall survival.

WHO/ISUP classification, grading and pathological staging of renal cell carcinoma: standards and controversies

PURPOSE

Pathological parameters assessed on biopsies and resection specimens have a pivotal role in the diagnosis, prognosis and management of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

METHODS

A non-systematic literature search was performed, updated to January 2018, to identify key standards and controversies in the pathological classification, grading and staging of RCC.

RESULTS

Although most RCCs exhibit characteristic morphology that enables easy categorisation, RCCs show considerable morphological heterogeneity and it is not uncommon for there to be difficulty in assigning a tumour type, especially with rarer tumour subtypes. The differentiation between benign and malignant oncocytic tumours remains a particular challenge. The development of additional immunohistochemical and molecular tests is needed to facilitate tumour typing, because of the prognostic and therapeutic implications, and to enable more reliable identification of poorly differentiated metastatic tumours as being of renal origin. Any new tests need to be applicable to small biopsy samples, to overcome the heterogeneity of renal tumours. There is also a need to facilitate identification of tumour types that have genetic implications, to allow referral and management at specialist centres. Digital pathology has a potential role in such referral practice.

CONCLUSION

Much has been done to standardise pathological assessment of renal cell carcinomas in recent years, but there still remain areas of difficulty in classification and grading of these heterogeneous tumours.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Unenhanced CT Analysis to Differentiate Low-Grade From High-Grade Chromophobe Renal Cell Carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

The objective of our study was to evaluate tumor attenuation and texture on unenhanced CT for potential differentiation of low-grade from high-grade chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study of 37 consecutive patients with chromophobe RCC (high-grade, n = 13; low-grade, n = 24) who underwent preoperative unenhanced CT between 2011 and 2016 was performed. Two radiologists (readers 1 and 2) blinded to the histologic grade of the tumor and outcome of the patients subjectively evaluated tumor homogeneity (3-point scale: completely homogeneous, mildly heterogeneous, or mostly heterogeneous). A third radiologist, also blinded to tumor grade and patient outcome, measured attenuation and contoured tumors for quantitative texture analysis. Comparisons were performed between high-grade and low-grade tumors using the chi-square test for subjective variables and sex, independent t tests for patient age and tumor attenuation, and Mann-Whitney U tests for texture analysis. Logistic regression models and ROC curves were computed.

RESULTS

There were no differences in age or sex between the groups (p = 0.652 and 0.076). High-grade tumors were larger (mean ± SD, 62.6 ± 34.9 mm [range, 17.0-141.0 mm] vs 39.0 ± 17.9 mm [16.0-72.3 mm]; p = 0.009) and had higher attenuation (mean ± SD, 45.5 ± 8.2 HU [range, 29.0-55.0 HU] vs 35.3 ± 8.5 HU [14.0-51.0 HU]; p = 0.001) than low-grade tumors. CT size and attenuation achieved good accuracy to diagnose high-grade chromophobe RCC: The AUC ± standard error was 0.85 ± 0.08 (p < 0.0001) with a sensitivity of 69.0% and a specificity of 100%. Subjectively, high-grade tumors were more heterogeneous (mildly or markedly heterogeneous: 69.2% [9/13] for reader 1 and 76.9% [10/13] for reader 2; reader 1, p = 0.024; reader 2, p = 0.001) with moderate agreement (κ = 0.57). Combined texture features diagnosed high-grade tumors with a maximal AUC of 0.84 ± 0.06 (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Tumor attenuation and heterogeneity assessed on unenhanced CT are associated with high-grade chromophobe RCC and correlate well with the histopathologic chromophobe tumor grading system.

Selected tumor markers in the routine diagnosis of chromophobe renal cell carcinoma

Renal cell carcinoma is one of the most malignant tumors, affecting men more frequently than women and constituting nearly 90% of all kidney tumors. Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma has been described as a new histological type of renal cell carcinoma. Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma constitutes up to 5% of all cases of kidney cancer. It is characterized by a significant number of deletions in many chromosomes, as well as the loss of entire chromosomes. Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma arises from tubular cells or cells of the macula densa. In contrast to other types of kidney cancer, it occurs with equal frequency in men and women, mostly in the sixth decade of life. It is characterized by a relatively good prognosis and exhibits a low degree of malignancy. Histopathologic diagnosis of ChRCC can be a diagnostic challenge because these tumors may resemble oncocytoma or conventional cancer. Research by Mathers et al. proposed the use of cytokeratin 7 as a marker useful in the differentiation of these changes.

The 2016 WHO Classification of Tumours of the Urinary System and Male Genital Organs-Part A: Renal, Penile, and Testicular Tumours

The fourth edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of urogenital tumours (WHO "blue book"), published in 2016, contains significant revisions. These revisions were performed after consideration by a large international group of pathologists with special expertise in this area. A subgroup of these persons met at the WHO Consensus Conference in Zurich, Switzerland, in 2015 to finalize the revisions. This review summarizes the most significant differences between the newly published classification and the prior version for renal, penile, and testicular tumours. Newly recognized epithelial renal tumours are hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell carcinoma (RCC) syndrome-associated RCC, succinate dehydrogenase-deficient RCC, tubulocystic RCC, acquired cystic disease-associated RCC, and clear cell papillary RCC. The WHO/International Society of Urological Pathology renal tumour grading system was recommended, and the definition of renal papillary adenoma was modified. The new WHO classification of penile squamous cell carcinomas is based on the presence of human papillomavirus and defines histologic subtypes accordingly. Germ cell neoplasia in situ (GCNIS) of the testis is the WHO-recommended term for precursor lesions of invasive germ cell tumours, and testicular germ cell tumours are now separated into two fundamentally different groups: those derived from GCNIS and those unrelated to GCNIS. Spermatocytic seminoma has been designated as a spermatocytic tumour and placed within the group of non-GCNIS-related tumours in the 2016 WHO classification.

PATIENT SUMMARY

The 2016 World Health Organization (WHO) classification contains new renal tumour entities. The classification of penile squamous cell carcinomas is based on the presence of human papillomavirus. Germ cell neoplasia in situ of the testis is the WHO-recommended term for precursor lesions of invasive germ cell tumours.

Distal nephron neoplasms

Tumours of the distal nephron are uncommon but can create diagnostic difficulties. They may be divided into three groups-tumours of intercalated cell phenotype, those of principal cell phenotype and others with an unconfirmed distal nephron origin. Oncocytomas, chromophobe carcinoma and hybrid oncocytoma chromophobe carcinoma, all show features of intercalated cells and the distinction amongst these is one of the most common areas of diagnostic dilemma. Collecting duct carcinoma and renal medullary carcinoma are the most aggressive forms of renal cancer but recent evidence suggests they may respond to targeted therapy so their recognition becomes crucial to the management of these patients. There remains debate over the precise phenotype of both tubulocystic carcinoma and mucinous tubular and spindle cell carcinoma.

Diagnostic approach to eosinophilic renal neoplasms

CONTEXT

Eosinophilic renal neoplasms include a spectrum of solid and papillary tumors ranging from indolent benign oncocytoma to highly aggressive malignancies. Recognition of the correct nature of the tumor, especially in biopsy specimens, is paramount for patient management.

OBJECTIVE

To review the diagnostic approach to eosinophilic renal neoplasms with light microscopy and ancillary techniques.

DATA SOURCES

Review of the published literature and personal experience.

CONCLUSIONS

The following tumors are in the differential diagnosis of oncocytic renal cell neoplasm: oncocytoma, chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (RCC), hybrid tumor, tubulocystic carcinoma, papillary RCC, clear cell RCC with predominant eosinophilic cell morphology, follicular thyroid-like RCC, hereditary leiomyomatosis-associated RCC, acquired cystic disease-associated RCC, rhabdoid RCC, microphthalmia transcription factor translocation RCC, epithelioid angiomyolipoma, and unclassified RCC. In low-grade nonpapillary eosinophilic neoplasms, distinction between oncocytoma and low-grade RCC mostly rests on histomorphology; however, cytokeratin 7 immunostain may be helpful. In high-grade nonpapillary lesions, there is more of a role for ancillary techniques, including immunohistochemistry for cytokeratin 7, CA9, CD10, racemase, HMB45, and Melan-A. In papillary eosinophilic neoplasms, it is important to distinguish sporadic type 2 papillary RCC from microphthalmia transcription factor translocation and hereditary leiomyomatosis-associated RCC. Histologic and cytologic features along with immunohistochemistry and fluorescence in situ hybridization tests for TFE3 (Xp11.2) and TFEB [t(6;11)] are reliable confirmatory tests. Eosinophilic epithelial neoplasms with architecture, cytology, and/or immunoprofile not qualifying for either of the established types of RCC should be classified as unclassified eosinophilic RCC and arbitrarily assigned a grade (low or high).

Relating prognosis in chromophobe renal cell carcinoma to the chromophobe tumor grading system

Purpose

The chromophobe subtype of renal cell carcinoma (chRCC) has generally been associated with a better prognosis than the clear cell type; however, debate continues as to absolute prognosis as well as the significance of certain prognostic variables. We investigated the significance of pathologic stage and a recently proposed chromophobe tumor grading (CTG) scheme in predicting chRCC outcomes.

Materials and Methods

All available chRCCs were identified from our surgical pathology archives from 1987-2010. Original slides were reviewed to verify diagnoses and stage, and each case was graded following a novel chromophobe tumor grade system criteria. Disease status was obtained from a clinical outcome database, and cancer specific deaths and recurrences were recorded.

Results

Eighty-one cases of chRCC were identified, and 73 had adequate follow-up information available. There were only 3 instances of cancer related recurrence or mortality, which included 1 disease specific mortality and 2 disease recurrences. Pathologic stage and CTG 3 were found to be significantly associated with the recurrences or death from chRCC, but there was no association with CTG 1 and CTG 2.

Conclusions

chRCC is associated with a very low rate of cancer specific events (4.1%) even at a tertiary referral center. In our study, pathologic stage and CTG 3, but not CTG 1 or 2, were significantly associated with the development of these events.

Fuhrman grade [corrected] has no added value in prediction of mortality after partial or [corrected] radical nephrectomy for chromophobe renal cell carcinoma patients

Our objective was to test whether Fuhrman grade [corrected] (FG) is applicable in the context of chromophobe renal cell carcinoma patients treated with partial and radical nephrectomy. Patients (n=1862) with chromophobe renal cell carcinoma treated with partial and radical nephrectomy were identified within the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (1988-2008). Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were fitted to predict cancer-specific mortality. Discriminant properties were assessed for the conventional four-tiered FG scheme. Additionally, discrimination of the three-tiered FG scheme (1-2 vs 3 vs 4) and the two-tiered FG scheme (1-2 vs 3-4) was also assessed. The statistical significance of the differences in accuracy estimates was compared using the Mantel-Haenszel test. A total of 65 of the 1862 died of the disease. The overall 5-year cancer-specific mortality-free survival rate was 94.8% (95% confidence interval: 93.5-96.2). In univariable analyses, none of the FG strata were significantly associated with cancer-specific mortality. Furthermore, FG was less informative (63%) than tumor size (72%) and tumor stage (69%), using measures of discrimination in univariable analyses. After accounting for all covariates, prediction of 5-year cancer-specific mortality was 79.0% vs 80.3% accurate, respectively, with vs without the consideration of FG (P=0.01). Similar discrimination estimates were obtained for the modified three-tiered FG scheme (78.5%; P=0.009) and the modified two-tiered FG scheme (79.5%; P=0.02). In conclusion, FG is not an informative predictor of prognosis, defined as cancer-specific mortality, after partial and radical nephrectomy for chromophobe renal cell carcinoma patients.

Pathologic validation of renal cell carcinoma histology in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program

PURPOSE

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program is an important epidemiologic research tool to study cancer. No information is available on its pathologic accuracy for renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

METHODS

Central pathology review was analyzed as a part of the United States Kidney Cancer Study. Cases previously identified through the Detroit SEER registry were reviewed. The sensitivity and specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated for each SEER-assigned subtype, with the central review assignments used as the reference.

RESULTS

Of the 498 cases included in this study, 490 (98.5%) were confirmed to be RCC. The overall agreement for histology was 78.2% (κ = 0.55); however, individual cases were frequently reclassified. The sensitivity and specificity for SEER-assigned clear cell RCC were 79.1% and 88.1%, respectively, when based solely on the ICD-O-3 morphology code 8310 (n = 310), and 99.2% and 80.5% when 8312 (RCC not otherwise specified; n = 41) was also assumed to be clear cell. Although RCC not otherwise specified is frequently grouped with clear cell, only 78.1% had this histology. Assignments of papillary and chromophobe RCC had comparable sensitivities (73.5% and 72.4%, respectively) and specificities (97.5% and 97.6%). Positive predictive values for clear cell (excluding/including 8312), papillary, and chromophobe RCC were 95.5%/93.5%, 85.9%, and 65.6%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings confirm that nearly all RCC cases are correctly classified in SEER. The positive predictive value was higher for clear cell RCC than for papillary or chromophobe RCC, suggesting that pathologic confirmation may be warranted for studies of non-clear cell tumors.

Histopathology of surgically treated renal cell carcinoma: survival differences by subtype and stage

PURPOSE

Previous studies of the impact of renal cell carcinoma histopathology on survival are conflicting and generally limited to institutional analyses. Thus, we determined the role of renal cell carcinoma histopathology on the stage specific survival rate in a large population based cohort.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used the 2000 to 2005 National Cancer Institute SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results) database to identify 17,605 patients who underwent surgery for renal cell carcinoma and met study inclusion criteria. Patients were stratified by histological subtype (clear cell, papillary, chromophobe, collecting duct and sarcomatoid differentiation) and pathological stage. We performed Cox proportional hazard modeling and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis to determine overall and cancer specific survival.

RESULTS

Patients with papillary and chromophobe pathology were less likely to present with T3 or greater disease (17.6% and 16.9%, respectively) while patients with collecting duct and sarcomatoid variants were more likely to present with T3 or greater disease (55.7% and 82.8%, respectively) compared to those with clear cell histology (p <0.001). On multivariate analysis histology was significantly associated with overall and cancer specific survival. Patients with chromophobe pathology had improved survival (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.40-0.78) while those with collecting duct and sarcomatoid variants had worse survival (HR 2.07, 95% CI 1.44-2.97 and 2.26, 95% CI 1.93-2.64, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Renal cell carcinoma histological subtype predicts overall and cancer specific survival. Patients with collecting duct and sarcomatoid variants of renal cell carcinoma have poor survival, even those who present with low stage disease. These data suggest inherent differences in renal cell carcinoma biology and may ultimately form the basis of future histologically targeted therapies.

Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma: the impact of tumor grade on outcome

It has been reported that Fuhrman grading is not appropriate for chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The objective of this study was to determine whether nucleolar grading and the recently described chromophobe RCC grading system by Paner and colleagues provide prognostic information. Pathologic features of 185 patients with chromophobe RCC treated surgically between 1970 and 2006 were reviewed, including nucleolar grade, chromophobe RCC grade, the 2010 TNM groupings, sarcomatoid differentiation, and coagulative tumor necrosis. Cancer-specific (CS) survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and associations with CS survival were evaluated using Cox proportional hazard regression models. Twenty-three patients died from RCC at a mean of 3.0 years after surgery (median 1.3; range 0 to 16) with estimated CS rates (95% confidence interval) of 89% (84 to 94), 86% (81 to 92), and 85% (78 to 91) at 5, 10, and 15 years after surgery. Univariate associations with CS survival included the 2010 TNM stage groupings, sarcomatoid differentiation, coagulative tumor necrosis, chromophobe RCC grade, and nucleolar grade (all P<0.001). These last 4 features remained significantly associated with CS survival after adjusting for the 2010 TNM stage groupings. When the analysis was restricted to the 155 patients with nonsarcomatoid TNM stage groupings I and II chromophobe RCC, only stage grouping (I vs. II) was significantly associated with CS survival (P=0.03). Although the chromophobe RCC grading system described by Paner and colleagues and nucleolar grade are associated with CS survival in chromophobe RCC, they add no additional prognostic information once TNM stage and sarcomatoid differentiation are assessed.