Indications for biopsy and the current status of focal therapy for renal tumours

Concordance between renal tumour biopsy and robotic-assisted partial and radical nephrectomy histology: a 10-year experience

We aimed to assess concordance between renal tumour biopsy (RTB) and surgical pathology from robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) or robotic-assisted radical nephrectomy (RARN). Patients with preoperative RTB undergoing RAPN or RARN for suspected malignancy (9 September 2013-9 September 2023) were enrolled retrospectively from three sites. Patients were excluded if the tumour had prior cryotherapy or if biopsy or nephrectomy histology were unavailable or inconclusive. The primary outcome was concordance with the presence/absence of malignancy. Secondary outcomes were concordance with tumour subtype, World Health Organisation nuclear grade (patients with RTB clear cell or papillary RCC only), false-negative rate, false-positive rate, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). In the enrolment period, 332 and 132 patients underwent RAPN and RARN, respectively. Of these, 160 received preoperative RTB, with nine patients excluded, leaving 151 eligible patients. Median age was 63 years, and 49 (32%) were female. On surgical specimens, 144 patients had malignant histology. RTB was highly concordant with presence/absence of malignancy (147/151, 97%). Concordance with tumour subtype occurred in 141 patients (93%), while concordance with nuclear grade was seen in 42/66 patients (64%, RTB grade missing in 53 patients). False-negative rate, false-positive rate, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were 2%, 14%, 98%, 86%, 99%, and 67%, respectively. Limitations include absence of complication data and exclusion of patients biopsied without surgery. In patients undergoing RAPN or RARN, preoperative RTB has high concordance with surgical pathology, both in the presence of malignancy and RCC subtype.

Diagnostic accuracy of image-guided biopsies in small (<4 cm) renal masses with implications for active surveillance: a systematic review of the evidence

OBJECTIVE:

To determine the safety and diagnostic accuracy of renal tumour biopsies in a defined population of small renal masses (SRMs) only <4 cm using 3 × 2 table, intention to diagnose approach. 3 × 2 table approach examines indeterminate results as a separate category rather than pushing these through traditional 2 × 2 table (four-cell matrix) approach.

METHODS:

A highly sensitive search was performed in the Cochrane Library, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects; MEDLINE and MEDLINE in Process, EMBASE and conference proceedings (1966-2016) for the acquisition of data on the diagnostic accuracy and complications of RTB in patients with SRM <4 cm. Methodological quality and risk of bias was assessed using QUADAS-2. Test characteristics were calculated using conventional 2 × 2 contingency table analysis excluding non-diagnostic biopsies, and an intention-to-diagnose approach with a 3 × 2 table for pooled estimates of the sensitivity and specificity.

RESULTS:

A total of 20 studies were included with a total sample size of 974. The pooled estimates for sensitivity and specificity of RTB based upon univariate analysis using 2 × 2 table observed sensitivity 0.952 [confidence interval (CI) 0.908-0.979] and specificity 0.824 (CI 0.566-0.962). Using the 3 × 2 table and intention-to-diagnose principle, sensitivity 0.947 (CI 0.925-0.965) and specificity 0.609 (CI 0.385-0.803) decreased.

CONCLUSION:

RTB in SRMs (<4 cm) is associated with a high diagnostic sensitivity but poor specificity when non-diagnostic results are included by a 3 × 2 table for analysis (intention to diagnose approach). Risk of non-diagnostic results and poor quality of research need addressing through future studies, preferably by a well-designed prospective study appropriately powered for diagnostic accuracy using valid reference standards.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE:

A comprehensive synthesis of literature on image-guided biopsies in SRMs using a different methodology and study design.

Identification of clear cell renal cell carcinoma and oncocytoma using a three-gene promoter methylation panel

BACKGROUND

Promoter methylation has emerged as a promising class of epigenetic biomarkers for diagnosis and prognosis of renal cell tumors (RCTs). Although differential gene promoter methylation patterns have been reported for the major subtypes (clear cell, papillary and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma, and oncocytoma), validation of diagnostic performance in independent series have been seldom performed. Herein, we aimed at assessing the diagnostic performance of genes previously shown to be hypermethylated in RCTs in different clinical settings.

METHODS

Promoter methylation levels of HOXA9 and OXR1 were assessed by quantitative methylation specific PCR. ROC curves were generated for OXR1, OXR1 combined with MST1R and HOXA9. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy were computed, maximizing specificity. Methylation levels were also correlated with clinical and pathological relevant parameters.

RESULTS

HOXA9 and OXR1 promoter methylation was disclosed in 73 and 87% of RCTs, respectively. A two-gene methylation panel comprising OXR1 and MST1R identified malignancy with 98% sensitivity and 100% specificity, and clear cell renal cell carcinoma with 90% sensitivity and 98% specificity. HOXA9 promoter methylation allowed for discrimination between oncocytoma and both papillary and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma but only with 77% sensitivity and 73% specificity. Significantly higher OXR1 promoter methylation levels (p = 0.005) were associated with high nuclear grade in ccRCC.

CONCLUSIONS

A panel including OXR1 and MST1R promoter methylation allows specific and sensitive identification of renal cell tumors, and, especially, of clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Moreover, higher OXR1 promoter methylation levels associate with clear cell renal cell carcinoma nuclear grade, a surrogate for tumor aggressiveness. Thus, gene promoter methylation analysis might a useful ancillary tool in diagnostic management of renal masses.

Aorta-Lesion-Attenuation-Difference (ALAD) on contrast-enhanced CT: a potential imaging biomarker for differentiating malignant from benign oncocytic neoplasms

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether the Aorta-Lesion-Attenuation-Difference on contrast-enhanced CT can aid in the differentiation of malignant and benign oncocytic renal neoplasms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two independent cohorts-an initial (biopsy) dataset and a validation (surgical) dataset-with oncocytomas and chromophobe renal cell carcinomas (chRCC) were included in this IRB-approved retrospective study. A region of interest was placed on the renal mass and abdominal aorta on the same CT image slice to calculate an Aorta-Lesion-Attenuation-Difference (ALAD). ROC curves were plotted for different enhancement phases, and diagnostic performance of ALAD for differentiating chRCC from oncocytomas was calculated.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine renal masses (56 oncocytomas, 23 chRCC) were analyzed in the initial (biopsy) dataset. Thirty-six renal masses (16 oncocytomas, 20 chRCC) were reviewed in the validation (surgical) cohort. ALAD showed a statistically significant difference between oncocytomas and chromophobes during the nephrographic phase (p < 0.001), early excretory phase (p < 0.001), and excretory phase (p = 0.029). The area under the ROC curve for the nephrographic phase was 1.00 (95% CI: 1.00-1.00) for the biopsy dataset and showed the narrowest confidence interval. At a threshold value of 25.5 HU, sensitivity was 100 (82.2%-100%) and specificity was 81.5 (61.9%-93.7%). When tested on the validation dataset on measurements made by an independent reader, the AUROC was 0.93 (95% CI: 0.84-1.00) with a sensitivity of 100 (80.0%-100%) and a specificity of 87.5 (60.4%-97.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Nephrographic phase ALAD has potential to differentiate benign and malignant oncocytic renal neoplasms on contrast-enhanced CT if histologic evaluation on biopsy is indeterminate.