Diagnostic criteria for oncocytic renal neoplasms: a survey of urologic pathologists
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké Médium print-electronic
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články
PubMed
28315424
DOI
10.1016/j.humpath.2017.03.004
PII: S0046-8177(17)30076-X
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- Klíčová slova
- Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma, Diagnostic criteria, Hybrid tumor, Immunohistochemistry, Oncocytoma, Tumor classification,
- MeSH
- biopsie MeSH
- diagnostické techniky molekulární MeSH
- diferenciální diagnóza MeSH
- imunohistochemie MeSH
- karcinom z renálních buněk chemie genetika patologie MeSH
- keratin-7 analýza MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mitotický index MeSH
- nádorové biomarkery analýza genetika MeSH
- nádory ledvin chemie genetika patologie MeSH
- oxyfilní adenom chemie genetika patologie MeSH
- patologové * MeSH
- prediktivní hodnota testů MeSH
- prognóza MeSH
- proliferace buněk MeSH
- průzkumy zdravotní péče MeSH
- urologové * MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- Názvy látek
- keratin-7 MeSH
- KRT7 protein, human MeSH Prohlížeč
- nádorové biomarkery MeSH
Renal oncocytoma and chromophobe renal cell carcinoma 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 of 26 invitees. Histologically, more than 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 the following: cytokeratin 7 (94%), KIT (71%), vimentin (65%), colloidal iron (59%), CD10 (53%), and AMACR (41%). Rare cytokeratin 7-positive cells (≤5%) were regarded as most supportive of oncocytoma, although an extent excluding oncocytoma was not universal. Multiple chromosomal losses were most strongly supportive for chromophobe renal cell carcinoma 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.
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Detroit MI 48202 United States
Department of Pathology and Molecular Medicine McMaster University Hamilton Ontario L5M 2N1 Canada
Department of Pathology Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center New York NY 10065 United States
Department of Pathology New York University Medical Center New York NY 10016 United States
Department of Pathology University Hospital Zurich Zurich CH 8091 Switzerland
Department of Pathology University of Michigan School of Medicine Ann Arbor MI 48109 United States
Robert J Tomsich Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Institute Cleveland Clinic Cleveland OH 44195 USA
Vattikutti Urology Institute Henry Ford Health System Detroit MI 48202 USA
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
Acceptance of emerging renal oncocytic neoplasms: a survey of urologic pathologists
