Redirecting to http://dergipark.org.tr/_fragment?_hash=aU_I9ZjDzSeeR0BqSrqVSyltfL9ntJDFmEesL8fBwW4&_path=id%3D1216497%26_format%3Dhtml%26_locale%3Dtr%26_controller%3DApp%255CController%255CSite%255CArticleController%253A%253AesiArticleStats.
Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 44 Sayı: 4, 470 - 474, 31.12.2022

Sena Öztürk , Serkan Çelikgün , Neşe Yeldir

https://doi.org/10.7197/cmj.1216497

Öz

Anahtar Kelimeler

Renal cell carcinoma vascular invasion nuclear grade tumor diameters

Kaynakça

  • 1. Amin MB, Berney DM, Compèrat EM, et al. WHO Classification of Tumours of the Urinary System and Male Genital Tumours, 2016.
  • 2. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, Bray F, Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2021;71:209-249.
  • 3. Howlander N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, et al. SEER cancer statistics review 1975-2016. Natl. Cancer Institute. 2019.
  • 4. Zequi SdC, Mourao TC, Oliveira dMM, et al. Predictors of survival outcomes in non-metastatic renal cell carcinoma in Latin America and Spain: a multicentric analysis. Kidney Cancer. 2019;3(4):253-261.
  • 5. Karakök M. Renal Neoplaziler, Akademisyen Kitabevi, Ankara, 2021.
  • 6. Amin MB, Paner GP, Alvarado-Cabrero I, et al. Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma: histomorphologic characteristic and evaluation of convertional pathologic prognostic parameters in 145 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 2008;32(12):1822-1834.
  • 7. Lipworth L, Morgans AK, Edwards TL, et al. Renal cell cancer histological subtype distribution differs by race and sex. BJU Int. 2016;117(2):260-265.
  • 8. Delahunt B, Eble JN, Egevad L, Samaratunga H. Grading of renal cell carcinoma. Histopathology. 2019;74(1):4-17.
  • 9. Volpe A, Patard JJ. Prognostic factors in renal cell carcinoma. WorldJUrol. 2010;28(3):319-327.
  • 10. Zhang L, Wu B, Zha Z, Zhao H, Feng Y. The prognostic value and clinicopathological features of sarcomatoid differentiation in patients with renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. CancerManagRes. 2018;10:1687-1703.
  • 11. Thompson RH, Hill JR, Babayev Y, et al. Metastatic renal cell carcinoma risk according to tumor size. JUrol. 2009;182(1):41-45.
  • 12. Shi H, Cao C, Wen L, et al. Prognostic value of the ratio of maximum to minimum diameter of primary tumor in metastatic clear cell carcinoma. BMCUrol. 2022;22(1):95.
  • 13. Xie Y, Ma X, Li H, et al. Prognostic value of clinical and pathological features in Chinese patients with chromophobe renal cell carcinoma: A 10-year single-center study. JCancer. 2017; 8(17):3474-3479.
  • 14. Bedke J, Heide J, Ribback S, et al. Microvascular and lymphovascular tumour invasion are associated with poor prognosis and metastatic spread in renal cell carcinoma: a validation study in clinical practice. WorldJUrol. 2018;36(12):1943-1952.

Pathological Prognostic Features and Analysis of Renal Cell Carcinoma

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 44 Sayı: 4, 470 - 474, 31.12.2022

Sena Öztürk , Serkan Çelikgün , Neşe Yeldir

https://doi.org/10.7197/cmj.1216497

Öz

Renal cell carcinomas is 2-3% of all adult cancers. Kidney cancer is currently the seventh most common cancer in men and the tenth most common in women 1. There were 19,3 million new cancer diagnoses and 10 million cancer deaths worldwide in 2020 2.
Survival in renal cell carcinomas has a strong correlation with the stage of diagnosis. 5-year survival in stage 1 tumors is 93%, 72,5% in cases with local lymph node metastases and 12% in metastatic carcinomas cases 3. There is an inverse correlation between age / tumor size and survival. Metastatic lymph node, tumor necrosis and adipose tissue invasion are associated with poor prognosis 4.
The study is including 179 renal cell carcinoma cases. The clinical and pathological datas of these cases were retrospectively analyzed from the Cumhuriyet University Hospital patient system.
The distribution sex of cases are 111 males (62%) and 68 females (38%). The mean age of the 179 cases was 58,5±11,9 years (range of 21-90). The mean tumor diameter is 5,7±3,4 (range of 1-19 cm). The nuclear grades of cases are 53,1% with low grade and 46,8% with high grade.
Radical nephrectomies were evaluated for vascular invasion, ureter invasion, capsule/adipose tissue invasion, lymph node metastasis and adrenal gland metastasis.
There is a statistically significant relationship between nuclear grade and vein invasion, microvascular invasion, capsule/adipose tissue invasion (p<0,05). Also there is a statistically significant relationship between tumor diameters and vein invasion, microvascular invasion, capsule/adipose tissue invasion, lymph node metastases (p<0,05)
However, there is not a statistically significant relationship between subtypes and vein invasion, micro vascular invasion, capsule/adipose tissue invasion, lymph node metastases, adrenal gland metastases (p>0,05).
It was observed that the invasions increased as the nuclear grade and tumor diameters increased. These observations are statistically significant.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Renal cell carcinoma vascular invasion nuclear grade tumor diameters

Kaynakça

  • 1. Amin MB, Berney DM, Compèrat EM, et al. WHO Classification of Tumours of the Urinary System and Male Genital Tumours, 2016.
  • 2. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, Bray F, Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2021;71:209-249.
  • 3. Howlander N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, et al. SEER cancer statistics review 1975-2016. Natl. Cancer Institute. 2019.
  • 4. Zequi SdC, Mourao TC, Oliveira dMM, et al. Predictors of survival outcomes in non-metastatic renal cell carcinoma in Latin America and Spain: a multicentric analysis. Kidney Cancer. 2019;3(4):253-261.
  • 5. Karakök M. Renal Neoplaziler, Akademisyen Kitabevi, Ankara, 2021.
  • 6. Amin MB, Paner GP, Alvarado-Cabrero I, et al. Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma: histomorphologic characteristic and evaluation of convertional pathologic prognostic parameters in 145 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 2008;32(12):1822-1834.
  • 7. Lipworth L, Morgans AK, Edwards TL, et al. Renal cell cancer histological subtype distribution differs by race and sex. BJU Int. 2016;117(2):260-265.
  • 8. Delahunt B, Eble JN, Egevad L, Samaratunga H. Grading of renal cell carcinoma. Histopathology. 2019;74(1):4-17.
  • 9. Volpe A, Patard JJ. Prognostic factors in renal cell carcinoma. WorldJUrol. 2010;28(3):319-327.
  • 10. Zhang L, Wu B, Zha Z, Zhao H, Feng Y. The prognostic value and clinicopathological features of sarcomatoid differentiation in patients with renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. CancerManagRes. 2018;10:1687-1703.
  • 11. Thompson RH, Hill JR, Babayev Y, et al. Metastatic renal cell carcinoma risk according to tumor size. JUrol. 2009;182(1):41-45.
  • 12. Shi H, Cao C, Wen L, et al. Prognostic value of the ratio of maximum to minimum diameter of primary tumor in metastatic clear cell carcinoma. BMCUrol. 2022;22(1):95.
  • 13. Xie Y, Ma X, Li H, et al. Prognostic value of clinical and pathological features in Chinese patients with chromophobe renal cell carcinoma: A 10-year single-center study. JCancer. 2017; 8(17):3474-3479.
  • 14. Bedke J, Heide J, Ribback S, et al. Microvascular and lymphovascular tumour invasion are associated with poor prognosis and metastatic spread in renal cell carcinoma: a validation study in clinical practice. WorldJUrol. 2018;36(12):1943-1952.
Toplam 14 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Sağlık Kurumları Yönetimi
Bölüm Cerrahi Tıp Bilimleri Araştırma Yazıları
Yazarlar

Sena Öztürk 0000-0002-4872-1355

Serkan Çelikgün 0000-0003-1825-3113

Neşe Yeldir 0000-0002-3812-6245

Yayımlanma Tarihi 31 Aralık 2022
Kabul Tarihi 25 Aralık 2022
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2022 Cilt: 44 Sayı: 4

Kaynak Göster

AMA Öztürk S, Çelikgün S, Yeldir N. Pathological Prognostic Features and Analysis of Renal Cell Carcinoma. CMJ. Aralık 2022;44(4):470-474. doi:10.7197/cmj.1216497