Differentiation of subtypes of renal cell carcinoma: dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging versus diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging

Using the "2 standard deviations" rule with Dixon MRI to differentiate renal cell carcinoma types

BACKGROUND

Clear cell and non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) are distinguishable based on microscopic fat, detectable by chemical shift MRI. However, these assessments are often subjective. Conversely, Dixon MRIs and the "2 standard deviations" rule (2SDR) are quantitative methods that may decrease diagnostic subjectivity. Therefore, this study assessed the value of the 2SDR for detecting microscopic fat and thus differentiating clear cell and non-clear cell RCC using Dixon MRI.

METHODS

This retrospective study included patients with RCC who underwent preoperative Dixon MRI. The patients were grouped based on tumor type: clear cell RCC and non-clear cell RCC. The 2SDR value was calculated based on in-phase and opposed-phase images and then compared between the two groups. 2SDR values >0 indicated clear cell RCCs, whereas values <0 indicated non-clear cell RCC.

RESULTS

We included 151 patients; 114 patients had clear cell RCC, of which 106 had a 2SDR value >0. Furthermore, 37 patients had non-clear cell RCC, of which 3 had a 2SDR value >0. The 2SDR value was significantly higher in the clear cell RCC group than in the non-clear cell RCC group (p = 0.000). Overall, 93.0% (106/114) and 8.1% (3/37) of patients with clear cell and non-clear cell RCC, respectively, had microscopic fat. The evaluation indices for this 2SDR method were: accuracy: 92.72%, sensitivity: 92.98%, specificity: 91.89%, positive predictive value: 97.25%, and negative predictive value: 80.95%.

CONCLUSIONS

2SDR values calculated from Dixon magnetic resonance images can differentiate clear cell from non-clear cell RCCs by detecting microscopic fat.

PRECIS

The "2 standard deviations" rule value calculated from Dixon MR images differentiates clear cell from non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma with high efficiency by detecting microscopic fat.

Application of different methods used to measure the apparent diffusion coefficient of renal cell carcinoma on the same lesion and its correlation with ISUP nuclear grading

PURPOSE

To determine the most frequently used different apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurement methods in renal cell carcinoma (RCC), and their correlation with the International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) histologic grading system.

METHODS

A total of 99 patients who underwent diffusion-weighted imaging and whose pathologic diagnosis of RCC was confirmed were included in the study. As a result of a literature review, region of interest (ROI) selection and measurement methods were determined in five ways. These included a small ROI (ADC1) on the solid part of the lesion showing the most restriction; a large ROI (ADC2) on the solid part of the lesion showing restriction; ROI (ADC3) that covered the lesion in the cross-section with the largest diameter, which was obtained by placing ROIs (ADC4) covering the lesion on all sections of the lesion; three small ROIs (ADC5) on solid parts of the lesion showing the most restriction. Then, ADC measurements were made from the contralateral normal kidney parenchyma. Tumors were pathologically subdivided [71 clear cell RCCs (ccRCC), 17 chromophobe RCCs (chRCC), 11 papillary RCCs (pRCC)], and graded according to the ISUP nuclear grading system (42 high-grade, 57 low-grade). Data were analyzed statistically.

RESULTS

In all measurement methods, ADC values of RCCs were statistically significantly lower than normal kidney ADC values. There were no differences between the ADC3 and ADC4 measurements of RCCs (p = 0.999). There was a statistical difference in other measurement methods (p < 0.001). There were differences between ccRCCs and pRCCs and chRCCs in all measurement methods. In all measurement methods, pRCC and chRCC ADC values ​​were lower than ccRCC ADC values. When ISUP nuclear grading and ADC values ​​were compared, there was a statistically inverse correlation between all ADC measurements. The strongest correlation was found in the ADC1 and ADC5 measurements. When the ADC values ​​of ISUP low and high-grade groups were compared, a significant difference was found in the ADC5 measurement method (p = 0.046).

CONCLUSION

According to the findings of the study, ADC5 is the measurement method that shows the best correlation with the ISUP histologic grading system. Therefore, we think that ADC5 can be the primary measurement method for determining the ADC value of RCCs.

Diagnostic value of 18F-FDG PET/CT versus contrast-enhanced MRI for venous tumour thrombus and venous bland thrombus in renal cell carcinoma

The purpose of this study was to compare the ability of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT and contrast-enhanced MRI (CEMRI) to detect and grade venous tumour thrombus (VTT) and venous bland thrombus (VBT) in RCC and assess invasion of the venous wall by VTT. The PET/CT and CEMRI data of 41 patients with RCC were retrieved. The difference in maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) between VTT and VBT was analysed. According to their pathological diagnosis, the patients were divided into those with and without venous wall invasion. The PET/CT and CEMRI features, including the SUVmax of the primary lesion and VTT, maximum venous diameter, complete occlusion of the vein by VTT, and VTT morphology, were compared between the two groups. All 41 patients had VTT, and eleven of the 41 patients had VBT. The mean SUVmax of the VTT (6.33 ± 4. 68, n = 41) was significantly higher than that of the VBT (1.37 ± 0.26, n = 11; P < 0.001). Ten of the 11 cases of VBT were correctly diagnosed by ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT, and all 11 were diagnosed by CEMRI. Both ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT and CEMRI can effectively detect VTT and distinguish VTT from VBT. ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT is less effective in grading VTT than CEMRI. Complete venous occlusion by VTT indicates venous wall invasion.

Diagnostic test accuracy of ADC values for identification of clear cell renal cell carcinoma: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To perform a systematic review on apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values of renal tumor subtypes and meta-analysis on the diagnostic performance of ADC for differentiation of localized clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) from other renal tumor types.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies published until May 1, 2019, that reported ADC values of renal tumors. Methodological quality was evaluated. For the meta-analysis on diagnostic test accuracy of ADC for differentiation of ccRCC from other renal lesions, we applied a bivariate random-effects model and compared two subgroups of ADC measurement with vs. without cystic and necrotic areas.

RESULTS

We included 48 studies (2588 lesions) in the systematic review and 13 studies (1126 lesions) in the meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in ADC of renal parenchyma using b values of 0-800 vs. 0-1000 (p = 0.08). ADC measured on selected portions (sADC) excluding cystic and necrotic areas differed significantly from whole-lesion ADC (wADC) (p = 0.002). Compared to ccRCC, minimal-fat angiomyolipoma, papillary RCC, and chromophobe RCC showed significantly lower sADC while oncocytoma exhibited higher sADC. Summary estimates of sensitivity and specificity to differentiate ccRCC from other tumors were 80% (95% CI, 0.76-0.88) and 78% (95% CI, 0.64-0.89), respectively, for sADC and 77% (95% CI, 0.59-0.90) and 77% (95% CI, 0.69-0.86) for wADC. sADC offered a higher area under the receiver operating characteristic curve than wADC (0.852 vs. 0.785, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

ADC values of kidney tumors that exclude cystic or necrotic areas more accurately differentiate ccRCC from other renal tumor types than whole-lesion ADC values.

KEY POINTS

• Selective ADC of renal tumors, excluding cystic and necrotic areas, provides better discriminatory ability than whole-lesion ADC to differentiate clear cell RCC from other renal lesions, with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.852 vs. 0.785, respectively (p = 0.02). • Selective ADC of renal masses provides moderate sensitivity and specificity of 80% and 78%, respectively, for differentiation of clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) from papillary RCC, chromophobe RCC, oncocytoma, and minimal-fat angiomyolipoma. • Selective ADC excluding cystic and necrotic areas are preferable to whole-lesion ADC as an additional tool to multiphasic MRI to differentiate clear cell RCC from other renal lesions whether the highest b value is 800 or 1000.

Predictive Value of In Vivo MR Spectroscopy With Semilocalization by Adiabatic Selective Refocusing in Differentiating Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma From Other Subtypes

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic value of in vivo MR spectroscopy (MRS) with semilocalization by adiabatic selective refocusing (semi-LASER MRS) in differentiating clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) from the non-clear cell subtype. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. Sixteen patients with biopsy-proven RCC or masses highly suspicious for RCC were prospectively recruited to participate in the study. Single-voxel ¹H spectra were acquired using a 3-T MRI system, with a semi-LASER sequence acquired for renal tumors in 14 patients and for healthy renal tissue (control tissue) in 12 patients. Offline processing of the MR spectra was performed. MRI and spectra analysis were performed independently by radiologists who were blinded to the reference histopathologic findings. RESULTS. Semi-LASER MRS was diagnostic for nine of 11 patients (82%) with histopathologically proven clear cell RCC, showing a strong lipid peak in seven patients and a weaker lipid resonance in two others, whereas control spectra showed weakly positive findings in only one patient. MRS findings were negative for lipid resonance in two of three patients (67%) with non-clear cell tumors and were weakly positive in another patient. Semi-LASER MRS had a high sensitivity and positive predictive value of 82% and 90%, respectively, in addition to a specificity of 67%, a negative predictive value of 50%, and overall accuracy of 79% for the detection of clear cell RCC. Lipid resonance was detected by MRS for four of six clear cell RCCs with no intravoxel fat on chemical-shift MRI. CONCLUSION. The preliminary results of the present study show that semi-LASER MRS is promising for the noninvasive discrimination of clear cell RCC from non-clear cell RCC on the basis of detection of lipid resonance and that it provides an incremental yield compared with chemical-shift MRI.

Diagnostic Accuracy of MRI for Detection of Papillary Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of our study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of MRI in differentiation of papillary renal cell carcinoma (RCC) from other renal masses.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed searches of three electronic databases for studies that used MRI techniques to differentiate papillary RCC from other renal lesions. Methodologic quality was assessed, and diagnostic test accuracy was summarized using bivariate random-effects modeling or with construction of a summary ROC (SROC) curve.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies involving 275 papillary RCC lesions and 758 other renal masses met the inclusion criteria. Resulting summary estimates for the performance of MRI to differentiate papillary RCC from other renal lesions were a sensitivity of 79.6% (95% CI, 62.3-90.2%) and specificity of 88.1% (95% CI, 80.1-93.1%). In subgroup analysis, quantitative pooling of seven studies using enhancement in the corticomedullary phase resulted in a sensitivity of 85.6% (95% CI, 67.8-94.4%), specificity of 91.7% (95% CI, 76.0-97.5%), and area under the SROC curve of 0.894. Four studies used tumor appearance on T2-weighted imaging to detect papillary RCC, and results showed a pooled sensitivity of 89.9% (95% CI, 73.0-96.7%) and specificity of 84.9% (95% CI, 69.0-93.4%). Three studies used signal loss on T1-weighted in-phase imaging to detect papillary RCC but marked heterogeneity precluded pooling.

CONCLUSION

Meta-analysis supports moderate sensitivity and excellent specificity of quantitative enhancement in the corticomedullary phase for differentiating papillary RCC from other tumors. The accuracy of combining enhancement and T2 signal-intensity characteristics merits further evaluation as a potential aid for management decisions.

Histologic subtype needs to be considered after partial nephrectomy in patients with pathologic T1a renal cell carcinoma: papillary vs. clear cell renal cell carcinoma.J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2017;143:1845-1851. [PMID: 28451753 DOI: 10.1007/s00432-017-2430-6]

PURPOSE

We compared the oncological outcomes of papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC) with clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) after partial nephrectomy (PN) in patients with pathologic T1a RCC.

METHODS

After excluding patients with synchronous multiple renal tumors, familial RCC, and pathologic stage T1b or above, 759 patients with ccRCC and 84 patients with pRCC were included. We assessed the impact of histologic subtypes on oncologic outcomes after PN in patients with pathologic T1a RCC (median follow-up duration, 67 months).

RESULTS

There was no difference in patient and tumor characteristics between the 2 groups, except Fuhrman grade (p = 0.006). Kaplan-Meier analysis identified 5-year recurrence-free survival of 98.7 and 95.6% in patients with ccRCC and pRCC, respectively. However, 10-year recurrence-free survival in patients with ccRCC and pRCC was 96.1 and 73.0%, respectively (p < 0.001). Recurrence ≥5 years post surgery was more common in patients with pRCC compared with those with ccRCC (0.3 vs. 4.8%; p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, pRCC [hazard ratio (HR) 5.309; p = 0.001] was a significant risk factor for recurrence after PN in patients with pathologic T1a RCC, in addition to larger tumor size (HR 1.861; p = 0.038) and Fuhrman grade ≥3 (HR 5.176; p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with pathologic T1a RCC, recurrence after PN occurred more commonly in pRCC compared with ccRCC. As over half of the recurrence cases in patients with pRCC occurred ≥5 years post surgery, a longer follow-up time is required, even for those with pathologic stage T1a disease.