Abstract:BACKGROUND.
Most clinical trial reports in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) do not distinguish between histologic subtypes, making it difficult to assess specific treatment efficacy. The current retrospective study sought to define clinical features and outcome data for metastatic papillary RCC.
METHODS.
Clinical features, treatment outcome, and survival were evaluated in 38 patients with metastatic papillary RCC who underwent clinical evaluation at Memorial Sloan‐Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) between 1… Show more
“…43 PRCC is less aggressive than CCRCC with metastases reported in 5% to 12% of patients. 19,44 In recent years, PRCC has been divided into 2 subtypes on the basis of cytoplasmic features, nuclear features, and the presence or absence of nuclear pseudostratification. 45 A 2005 study 46 suggested that PRCC can be further subdivided into 4 different morphologic categories, which correspond to 2 different molecular groups, based on gene expression profiling data.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…59 These genetic differences likely underlie the decreased response to sunitinib and other targeted therapies seen in cases of metastatic PRCC. 11,44 There was hope that the study of cases of inherited type 1 PRCC, which are due to activating germline mutations of the c-MET oncogene, might provide insight into the inner workings of sporadic PRCC. Unfortunately, these activating mutations are uncommon outside of the syndromic setting, being present in approximately 10% of sporadic type 1 PRCCs.…”
Context.—The World Health Organization classification of renal tumors synthesizes morphologic, immunohistochemical, and molecular findings to define more than 40 tumor types. Of these, clear cell (conventional) renal cell carcinoma is the most common malignant tumor in adults and—with the exception of some rare tumors—the most deadly. The diagnosis of clear cell renal cell carcinoma on morphologic grounds alone is generally straightforward, but challenging cases are not infrequent. A misdiagnosis of clear cell renal cell carcinoma has clinical consequences, particularly in the current era of targeted therapies.
Objective.—To highlight morphologic mimics of clear cell renal cell carcinoma and provide strategies to help differentiate clear cell renal cell carcinoma from other renal tumors and lesions. The role of the pathologist in guiding treatment for renal malignancies will be emphasized to stress the importance of proper tumor classification in patient management.
Data Sources.—Published literature and personal experience.
Conclusions.—In challenging cases, submission of additional tissue is often an inexpensive and effective way to facilitate a correct diagnosis. If immunohistochemical stains are to be used, it is best to use a panel of markers, as no one marker is specific for a given renal tumor subtype. Selection of limited markers, based on a specific differential diagnosis, can be as useful as a large panel in reaching a definitive diagnosis. For renal tumors, both the presence and absence of immunoreactivity and the pattern of labeling (membranous, cytoplasmic, diffuse, focal) are important when interpreting the results of immunohistochemical stains.
“…43 PRCC is less aggressive than CCRCC with metastases reported in 5% to 12% of patients. 19,44 In recent years, PRCC has been divided into 2 subtypes on the basis of cytoplasmic features, nuclear features, and the presence or absence of nuclear pseudostratification. 45 A 2005 study 46 suggested that PRCC can be further subdivided into 4 different morphologic categories, which correspond to 2 different molecular groups, based on gene expression profiling data.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…59 These genetic differences likely underlie the decreased response to sunitinib and other targeted therapies seen in cases of metastatic PRCC. 11,44 There was hope that the study of cases of inherited type 1 PRCC, which are due to activating germline mutations of the c-MET oncogene, might provide insight into the inner workings of sporadic PRCC. Unfortunately, these activating mutations are uncommon outside of the syndromic setting, being present in approximately 10% of sporadic type 1 PRCCs.…”
Context.—The World Health Organization classification of renal tumors synthesizes morphologic, immunohistochemical, and molecular findings to define more than 40 tumor types. Of these, clear cell (conventional) renal cell carcinoma is the most common malignant tumor in adults and—with the exception of some rare tumors—the most deadly. The diagnosis of clear cell renal cell carcinoma on morphologic grounds alone is generally straightforward, but challenging cases are not infrequent. A misdiagnosis of clear cell renal cell carcinoma has clinical consequences, particularly in the current era of targeted therapies.
Objective.—To highlight morphologic mimics of clear cell renal cell carcinoma and provide strategies to help differentiate clear cell renal cell carcinoma from other renal tumors and lesions. The role of the pathologist in guiding treatment for renal malignancies will be emphasized to stress the importance of proper tumor classification in patient management.
Data Sources.—Published literature and personal experience.
Conclusions.—In challenging cases, submission of additional tissue is often an inexpensive and effective way to facilitate a correct diagnosis. If immunohistochemical stains are to be used, it is best to use a panel of markers, as no one marker is specific for a given renal tumor subtype. Selection of limited markers, based on a specific differential diagnosis, can be as useful as a large panel in reaching a definitive diagnosis. For renal tumors, both the presence and absence of immunoreactivity and the pattern of labeling (membranous, cytoplasmic, diffuse, focal) are important when interpreting the results of immunohistochemical stains.
“…5 However, patients with advanced stage unresectable papillary RCC have similar prognoses to those with clear cell RCC with a reported median survival of 8 to 13 months. 6,7 The largest series reporting on 270 patients with papillary RCC demonstrated that about 4% of patients presented with metastatic disease, with lung (47% to 78%) and retroperitoneal lymph nodes (34% to 61%) as the two most common sites of metastasis. 6,7 Treatment has included surgery or chemotherapy alone, or a combination of the two depending on both patient and tumor related factors, such as the site of metastasis and patient performance status.…”
E54Cite as: Can Urol Assoc J 2012;6(2):e54-56. http://dx.doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.11144
AbstractMetastatic papillary renal cell carcinoma (RCC) to the heart has never been reported. We report the case of a 73-year-old patient with papillary RCC metastatic to the left and right ventricles, found during a triple vessel coronary artery bypass graft surgery.
IntroductionMetastatic tumour involvement of the heart from clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has been previously reported. [1][2][3][4] However, cardiac metastasis from papillary RCC has not yet been described. Papillary (or chromophilic) RCC, which accounts for 7% to 14% of adult renal neoplasms, is associated with a better prognosis than clear cell RCC. 5 We describe a patient diagnosed with papillary RCC found to have occult infiltrating bi-ventricular metastases discovered during triple vessel coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG).
Case reportA 73-year-old man with a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and hypertension was evaluated for rightsided abdominal pain, weight loss and anemia. Physical exam revealed a palpable right sided abdominal mass. Abdominal computed tomography (CT) revealed a 9 × 7 cm cystic mass arising from the right kidney suspicious for cystic RCC. Additional staging workup was negative for metastatic disease. In anticipation of operative exploration, preoperative electrocardiogram was performed and showed ST segment depression in the anterior and septal leads. This was followed up by a nuclear stress test which was positive for a reversible perfusion defect. Left heart catheterization showed severe stenosis in the distal left main coronary artery, along with three-vessel coronary artery disease. Echocardiography demonstrated normal ventricular systolic function.The patient was taken to the operating room for triple vessel CABG with a left internal mammary to left anterior descending coronary artery, a saphenous vein to the posterior descending artery branch of the right coronary artery, and a saphenous vein to the obtuse marginal branch of the circumflex coronary artery. During the operation, there were two 2 × 2 cm epicardial masses infiltrating into the myocardium: one on the right ventricle near the proximal segment of the coronary sinus and the other on the left ventricular wall near the apex. These were biopsied and sent for pathologic examination (Fig. 1a). The patient had an uneventful postoperative course and was discharged. After being discussed at a multidisciplinary tumour board, the patient underwent an open right radical nephrectomy without any complications and the final pathology (Fig. 1b) revealed papillary RCC type II (T2a, N0, M1). The patient underwent systemic chemotherapy with sunitinib and is doing well at the 8-month follow-up.
DiscussionCardiac metastases from clear cell RCC are rare. A large autopsy study of 11 432 patients showed 264 cases of cardiac metastases, of which only 3 (1.1%) were renal in origin.
5Metastatic tumours may reach the heart hematogenously, via lymphatic spread, or direc...
“…Sunitinib (sunitinib malate; SU11248; SUTENT ® ; Pfizer Inc, New York, NY, USA) is a novel multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor with high binding affinity for VEGFR and PDGFR that recently has shown anti-tumor and anti-angiogenic activities [49] . This drug recently received approval from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for two applications: advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) [50] and renal cell carcinoma [51] , in patients who are resistant or intolerant to treatment with Imatinib. Since the Tie receptor is an RTK, Sunitinib may be suitable to down-regulate the activity of the angiopoietin pathway.…”
AIM:To investigate the role of angiopoietin (Ang) -1, -2 and -4 and its receptors, Tie-1 and -2, in the growth and differentiation of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs).
METHODS:Thirty GISTs, seventeen leiomyomas and six schwannomas were examined by immunohistochemistry in this study.
RESULTS:Ang-1, -2 and -4 proteins were expressed in the cytoplasm of tumor cells, and Tie-1 and -2 were expressed both in the cytoplasm and on the membrane of all tumors. Immunohistochemical staining revealed that 66.7% of GISTs (20 of 30), 76.5% of leiomyomas (13 of 17) and 83.3% of schwannomas (5 of 6) were positive for Ang-1. 83.3% of GISTs (25 of 30), 82.4% of leiomyomas (14 of 17) and 100% of schwannomas (6 of 6) were positive for Ang-2. 36.7% of GISTs (11 of 30), 58.8% of leiomyomas (10 of 17) and 83.3% of schwannomas (5 of 6) were positive for Ang-4. 60.0% of GISTs (18 of 30), 82.4% of leiomyomas and 100% of schwannomas (6 of 6) were positive for Tie-1. 10.0% of GISTs (3 of 30), 94.1% of leiomyomas (16 of 17) and 33.3% of schwannomas (2 of 6) were positive for Tie-2. Tie-2 expression was statistically different between GISTs and leiomyomas (P < 0.001). However, there was no correlation between expression of angiopoietin pathway components and clinical risk categories.
CONCLUSION:Our results suggest that the angiopoietin pathway plays an important role in the differentiation of GISTs, leiomyomas and schwannomas.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.