Diagnosis and Treatment of Small Renal Masses: Where Do We Stand?

Management of Renal Cell Carcinoma: Promising Biomarkers and the Challenges to Reach the Clinic

The incidence of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is increasing worldwide, yet research within this field is lagging behind other cancers. Despite increased detection of early disease as a consequence of the widespread use of diagnostic CT scans, 25% of patients have disseminated disease at diagnosis. Similarly, around 25% progress to metastatic disease following curatively intended surgery. Surgery is the cornerstone in the treatment of RCC; however, when the disease is disseminated, immunotherapy or immunotherapy in combination with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor is the patient's best option. Immunotherapy is a potent treatment, with durable treatment responses and potential to cure the patient, but only half of the patients benefit from the administered treatment, and there are currently no methods that can identify which patients will respond to immunotherapy. Moreover, there is a need to identify the patients in greatest risk of relapsing after surgery for localized disease and direct adjuvant treatment there. Even though several molecular biomarkers have been published to date, we are still lacking routinely used biomarkers to guide optimal clinical management. The purpose of this review is to highlight some of the most promising biomarkers, discuss the efforts made within this field to date, and describe the barriers needed to be overcome to have reliable and robust predictive and prognostic biomarkers in the clinic for renal cancer.

The Use of Radiomic Tools in Renal Mass Characterization

The incidence of renal mass detection has increased during recent decades, with an increased diagnosis of small renal masses, and a final benign diagnosis in some cases. To avoid unnecessary surgeries, there is an increasing interest in using radiomics tools to predict histological results, using radiological features. We performed a narrative review to evaluate the use of radiomics in renal mass characterization. Conventional images, such as computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance (MR), are the most common diagnostic tools in renal mass characterization. Distinguishing between benign and malignant tumors in small renal masses can be challenging using conventional methods. To improve subjective evaluation, the interest in using radiomics to obtain quantitative parameters from medical images has increased. Several studies have assessed this novel tool for renal mass characterization, comparing its ability to distinguish benign to malign tumors, the results in differentiating renal cell carcinoma subtypes, or the correlation with prognostic features, with other methods. In several studies, radiomic tools have shown a good accuracy in characterizing renal mass lesions. However, due to the heterogeneity in the radiomic model building, prospective and external validated studies are needed.

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) of benign and malignant renal tumors: Distinguishing CEUS features differ with tumor size

BACKGROUND

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) is now a guideline-recommended strategy for diagnosing renal lesions. Tumor size is related to the risk of the treatment and prognosis in renal tumors. Thus, we aim to analyze the CEUS features of solid renal tumors in relation to tumor size.

METHODS

The CEUS appearance of 156 pathologically diagnosed solid renal tumors were retrospectively analyzed. Three groups were stratified according to the tumor size (≤2 cm [group I], 2.1-4 cm [group II] and 4.1-7 cm [group III]). For each group, the features of wash-in type, enhancement degree, enhancement homogeneity, and the presence of a pseudocapsule sign were compared between benign and malignant tumors.

RESULTS

All 156 included lesions were detected by CEUS. The proportion of benign tumors in three size groups was 37.1%, 19.4%, and 20.4%, respectively. The proportion of malignant tumors was highest (80.6%) in group II, followed by group III (79.6%) and group I (62.9%). In group I, malignant and benign tumors differed significantly in the presence of a pseudocapsule sign (p = 0.015) and homogeneity (p = 0.007). In group II, the degree of enhancement differed (p = 0.02) between tumor types. In group III, the two tumor types differed in both the wash-in pattern (p = 0.015) and enhancement degree (p = 0.024). The weighted and Cohen's kappa values for the concordance between inter-observer agreement ranged from 0.31 (95% CI: 0.36-0.57) to 0.90 (95% CI: 0.77-1.00).

CONCLUSIONS

CEUS features of malignant and benign renal tumors change along with the tumor size. The use of CEUS features in the diagnosis of benign and malignant tumors requires consideration of tumor size.