Renal Tumors: Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarkers

The International Society of Urological Pathology convened a consensus conference on renal cancer, preceded by an online survey, to address issues relating to the diagnosis and reporting of renal neoplasia. In this report, the role of biomarkers in the diagnosis and assessment of prognosis of renal...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The American journal of surgical pathology 2013-10, Vol.37 (10), p.1518-1531
Hauptverfasser: Tan, Puay Hoon, Cheng, Liang, Rioux-Leclercq, Nathalie, Merino, Maria J., Netto, George, Reuter, Victor E., Shen, Steven S., Grignon, David J., Montironi, Rodolfo, Egevad, Lars, Srigley, John R., Delahunt, Brett, Moch, Holger
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1531
container_issue 10
container_start_page 1518
container_title The American journal of surgical pathology
container_volume 37
creator Tan, Puay Hoon
Cheng, Liang
Rioux-Leclercq, Nathalie
Merino, Maria J.
Netto, George
Reuter, Victor E.
Shen, Steven S.
Grignon, David J.
Montironi, Rodolfo
Egevad, Lars
Srigley, John R.
Delahunt, Brett
Moch, Holger
description The International Society of Urological Pathology convened a consensus conference on renal cancer, preceded by an online survey, to address issues relating to the diagnosis and reporting of renal neoplasia. In this report, the role of biomarkers in the diagnosis and assessment of prognosis of renal tumors is addressed. In particular we focused upon the use of immunohistochemical markers and the approach to specific differential diagnostic scenarios. We enquired whether cytogenetic and molecular tools were applied in practice and asked for views on the perceived prognostic role of biomarkers. Both the survey and conference voting results demonstrated a high degree of consensus in participants’ responses regarding prognostic/predictive markers and molecular techniques, whereas it was apparent that biomarkers for these purposes remained outside the diagnostic realm pending clinical validation. Although no individual antibody or panel of antibodies reached consensus for classifying renal tumors, or for confirming renal metastatic disease, it was noted from the online survey that 87% of respondents used immunohistochemistry to subtype renal tumors sometimes or occasionally, and a majority (87%) used immunohistochemical markers (Pax 2 or Pax 8, renal cell carcinoma [RCC] marker, panel of pan-CK, CK7, vimentin, and CD10) in confirming the diagnosis of metastatic RCC. There was consensus that immunohistochemistry should be used for histologic subtyping and applied before reaching a diagnosis of unclassified RCC. At the conference, there was consensus that TFE3 and TFEB analysis ought to be requested when RCC was diagnosed in a young patient or when histologic appearances were suggestive of the translocation subtype; whereas Pax 2 and/or Pax 8 were considered to be the most useful markers in the diagnosis of a renal primary.
doi_str_mv 10.1097/PAS.0b013e318299f12e
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_swepu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_swepub_primary_oai_swepub_ki_se_526985</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1443398376</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4795-347254d4e116cceb5cf4023bf1b88658efd29b842e8772d7dc4004b470bd3ca83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdUctO3DAUtVArGCh_UFWzLItQXz9ip4tKUygPaaQiHmvLcW6YdDIxtRNG_H0dzUABL-z7OOdc24eQz0CPgRbq29Xs5piWFDhy0KwoamC4QyYgOctSv_hAJhSEyiRouUf2Y_xDKTANbJfsMUGZlIxNCLvGzrbT22HlQ_w-PW3sfedj37ip7arpVfDP6c_Gr2xYYoifyMfathEPt-cBuTv7dXtykc1_n1-ezOaZE6qQGReKSVEJBMidw1K6Ok3lZQ2l1rnUWFesKLVgqJVilaqcoFSUQtGy4s5qfkCyjW5c48NQmofQpBs8GW8bsy0tU4RGsrzQMuF_bPCps8LKYdcH276hve10zcLc-0cjVPon4EngaCOweEe7mM3NWKNAc8GZfoSE_bodFvzfAWNvVk102La2Qz9EA0JwXmiu8gQVG6gLPsaA9Ys2UDNaaZKV5r2Vifbl9XNeSM_e_ddd-7ZPvizbYY3BLNC2_cLQcQmlM5Z0YUyycZP8H0odqiQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1443398376</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Renal Tumors: Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarkers</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SWEPUB Freely available online</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>Tan, Puay Hoon ; Cheng, Liang ; Rioux-Leclercq, Nathalie ; Merino, Maria J. ; Netto, George ; Reuter, Victor E. ; Shen, Steven S. ; Grignon, David J. ; Montironi, Rodolfo ; Egevad, Lars ; Srigley, John R. ; Delahunt, Brett ; Moch, Holger</creator><creatorcontrib>Tan, Puay Hoon ; Cheng, Liang ; Rioux-Leclercq, Nathalie ; Merino, Maria J. ; Netto, George ; Reuter, Victor E. ; Shen, Steven S. ; Grignon, David J. ; Montironi, Rodolfo ; Egevad, Lars ; Srigley, John R. ; Delahunt, Brett ; Moch, Holger ; ISUP Renal Tumor Panel</creatorcontrib><description>The International Society of Urological Pathology convened a consensus conference on renal cancer, preceded by an online survey, to address issues relating to the diagnosis and reporting of renal neoplasia. In this report, the role of biomarkers in the diagnosis and assessment of prognosis of renal tumors is addressed. In particular we focused upon the use of immunohistochemical markers and the approach to specific differential diagnostic scenarios. We enquired whether cytogenetic and molecular tools were applied in practice and asked for views on the perceived prognostic role of biomarkers. Both the survey and conference voting results demonstrated a high degree of consensus in participants’ responses regarding prognostic/predictive markers and molecular techniques, whereas it was apparent that biomarkers for these purposes remained outside the diagnostic realm pending clinical validation. Although no individual antibody or panel of antibodies reached consensus for classifying renal tumors, or for confirming renal metastatic disease, it was noted from the online survey that 87% of respondents used immunohistochemistry to subtype renal tumors sometimes or occasionally, and a majority (87%) used immunohistochemical markers (Pax 2 or Pax 8, renal cell carcinoma [RCC] marker, panel of pan-CK, CK7, vimentin, and CD10) in confirming the diagnosis of metastatic RCC. There was consensus that immunohistochemistry should be used for histologic subtyping and applied before reaching a diagnosis of unclassified RCC. At the conference, there was consensus that TFE3 and TFEB analysis ought to be requested when RCC was diagnosed in a young patient or when histologic appearances were suggestive of the translocation subtype; whereas Pax 2 and/or Pax 8 were considered to be the most useful markers in the diagnosis of a renal primary.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0147-5185</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-0979</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e318299f12e</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24025522</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: by Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</publisher><subject>Biomarkers, Tumor - analysis ; Carcinoma, Renal Cell - diagnosis ; Carcinoma, Renal Cell - metabolism ; Genetics ; Humans ; Immunohistochemistry - standards ; Immunohistochemistry - utilization ; Kidney Neoplasms - diagnosis ; Kidney Neoplasms - metabolism ; Life Sciences ; Prognosis</subject><ispartof>The American journal of surgical pathology, 2013-10, Vol.37 (10), p.1518-1531</ispartof><rights>2013 by Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins.</rights><rights>Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4795-347254d4e116cceb5cf4023bf1b88658efd29b842e8772d7dc4004b470bd3ca83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4795-347254d4e116cceb5cf4023bf1b88658efd29b842e8772d7dc4004b470bd3ca83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,309,310,314,550,776,780,785,786,881,23909,23910,25118,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24025522$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://hal.science/hal-01064328$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttp://kipublications.ki.se/Default.aspx?queryparsed=id:128187679$$DView record from Swedish Publication Index$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Tan, Puay Hoon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheng, Liang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rioux-Leclercq, Nathalie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Merino, Maria J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Netto, George</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reuter, Victor E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shen, Steven S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grignon, David J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Montironi, Rodolfo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Egevad, Lars</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Srigley, John R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Delahunt, Brett</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moch, Holger</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ISUP Renal Tumor Panel</creatorcontrib><title>Renal Tumors: Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarkers</title><title>The American journal of surgical pathology</title><addtitle>Am J Surg Pathol</addtitle><description>The International Society of Urological Pathology convened a consensus conference on renal cancer, preceded by an online survey, to address issues relating to the diagnosis and reporting of renal neoplasia. In this report, the role of biomarkers in the diagnosis and assessment of prognosis of renal tumors is addressed. In particular we focused upon the use of immunohistochemical markers and the approach to specific differential diagnostic scenarios. We enquired whether cytogenetic and molecular tools were applied in practice and asked for views on the perceived prognostic role of biomarkers. Both the survey and conference voting results demonstrated a high degree of consensus in participants’ responses regarding prognostic/predictive markers and molecular techniques, whereas it was apparent that biomarkers for these purposes remained outside the diagnostic realm pending clinical validation. Although no individual antibody or panel of antibodies reached consensus for classifying renal tumors, or for confirming renal metastatic disease, it was noted from the online survey that 87% of respondents used immunohistochemistry to subtype renal tumors sometimes or occasionally, and a majority (87%) used immunohistochemical markers (Pax 2 or Pax 8, renal cell carcinoma [RCC] marker, panel of pan-CK, CK7, vimentin, and CD10) in confirming the diagnosis of metastatic RCC. There was consensus that immunohistochemistry should be used for histologic subtyping and applied before reaching a diagnosis of unclassified RCC. At the conference, there was consensus that TFE3 and TFEB analysis ought to be requested when RCC was diagnosed in a young patient or when histologic appearances were suggestive of the translocation subtype; whereas Pax 2 and/or Pax 8 were considered to be the most useful markers in the diagnosis of a renal primary.</description><subject>Biomarkers, Tumor - analysis</subject><subject>Carcinoma, Renal Cell - diagnosis</subject><subject>Carcinoma, Renal Cell - metabolism</subject><subject>Genetics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Immunohistochemistry - standards</subject><subject>Immunohistochemistry - utilization</subject><subject>Kidney Neoplasms - diagnosis</subject><subject>Kidney Neoplasms - metabolism</subject><subject>Life Sciences</subject><subject>Prognosis</subject><issn>0147-5185</issn><issn>1532-0979</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>D8T</sourceid><recordid>eNpdUctO3DAUtVArGCh_UFWzLItQXz9ip4tKUygPaaQiHmvLcW6YdDIxtRNG_H0dzUABL-z7OOdc24eQz0CPgRbq29Xs5piWFDhy0KwoamC4QyYgOctSv_hAJhSEyiRouUf2Y_xDKTANbJfsMUGZlIxNCLvGzrbT22HlQ_w-PW3sfedj37ip7arpVfDP6c_Gr2xYYoifyMfathEPt-cBuTv7dXtykc1_n1-ezOaZE6qQGReKSVEJBMidw1K6Ok3lZQ2l1rnUWFesKLVgqJVilaqcoFSUQtGy4s5qfkCyjW5c48NQmofQpBs8GW8bsy0tU4RGsrzQMuF_bPCps8LKYdcH276hve10zcLc-0cjVPon4EngaCOweEe7mM3NWKNAc8GZfoSE_bodFvzfAWNvVk102La2Qz9EA0JwXmiu8gQVG6gLPsaA9Ys2UDNaaZKV5r2Vifbl9XNeSM_e_ddd-7ZPvizbYY3BLNC2_cLQcQmlM5Z0YUyycZP8H0odqiQ</recordid><startdate>201310</startdate><enddate>201310</enddate><creator>Tan, Puay Hoon</creator><creator>Cheng, Liang</creator><creator>Rioux-Leclercq, Nathalie</creator><creator>Merino, Maria J.</creator><creator>Netto, George</creator><creator>Reuter, Victor E.</creator><creator>Shen, Steven S.</creator><creator>Grignon, David J.</creator><creator>Montironi, Rodolfo</creator><creator>Egevad, Lars</creator><creator>Srigley, John R.</creator><creator>Delahunt, Brett</creator><creator>Moch, Holger</creator><general>by Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</general><general>Lippincott, Williams &amp; Wilkins</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>1XC</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>ADTPV</scope><scope>AOWAS</scope><scope>D8T</scope><scope>ZZAVC</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201310</creationdate><title>Renal Tumors: Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarkers</title><author>Tan, Puay Hoon ; Cheng, Liang ; Rioux-Leclercq, Nathalie ; Merino, Maria J. ; Netto, George ; Reuter, Victor E. ; Shen, Steven S. ; Grignon, David J. ; Montironi, Rodolfo ; Egevad, Lars ; Srigley, John R. ; Delahunt, Brett ; Moch, Holger</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4795-347254d4e116cceb5cf4023bf1b88658efd29b842e8772d7dc4004b470bd3ca83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Biomarkers, Tumor - analysis</topic><topic>Carcinoma, Renal Cell - diagnosis</topic><topic>Carcinoma, Renal Cell - metabolism</topic><topic>Genetics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Immunohistochemistry - standards</topic><topic>Immunohistochemistry - utilization</topic><topic>Kidney Neoplasms - diagnosis</topic><topic>Kidney Neoplasms - metabolism</topic><topic>Life Sciences</topic><topic>Prognosis</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Tan, Puay Hoon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheng, Liang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rioux-Leclercq, Nathalie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Merino, Maria J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Netto, George</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reuter, Victor E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shen, Steven S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grignon, David J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Montironi, Rodolfo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Egevad, Lars</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Srigley, John R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Delahunt, Brett</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moch, Holger</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ISUP Renal Tumor Panel</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>SwePub</collection><collection>SwePub Articles</collection><collection>SWEPUB Freely available online</collection><collection>SwePub Articles full text</collection><jtitle>The American journal of surgical pathology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Tan, Puay Hoon</au><au>Cheng, Liang</au><au>Rioux-Leclercq, Nathalie</au><au>Merino, Maria J.</au><au>Netto, George</au><au>Reuter, Victor E.</au><au>Shen, Steven S.</au><au>Grignon, David J.</au><au>Montironi, Rodolfo</au><au>Egevad, Lars</au><au>Srigley, John R.</au><au>Delahunt, Brett</au><au>Moch, Holger</au><aucorp>ISUP Renal Tumor Panel</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Renal Tumors: Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarkers</atitle><jtitle>The American journal of surgical pathology</jtitle><addtitle>Am J Surg Pathol</addtitle><date>2013-10</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>1518</spage><epage>1531</epage><pages>1518-1531</pages><issn>0147-5185</issn><eissn>1532-0979</eissn><abstract>The International Society of Urological Pathology convened a consensus conference on renal cancer, preceded by an online survey, to address issues relating to the diagnosis and reporting of renal neoplasia. In this report, the role of biomarkers in the diagnosis and assessment of prognosis of renal tumors is addressed. In particular we focused upon the use of immunohistochemical markers and the approach to specific differential diagnostic scenarios. We enquired whether cytogenetic and molecular tools were applied in practice and asked for views on the perceived prognostic role of biomarkers. Both the survey and conference voting results demonstrated a high degree of consensus in participants’ responses regarding prognostic/predictive markers and molecular techniques, whereas it was apparent that biomarkers for these purposes remained outside the diagnostic realm pending clinical validation. Although no individual antibody or panel of antibodies reached consensus for classifying renal tumors, or for confirming renal metastatic disease, it was noted from the online survey that 87% of respondents used immunohistochemistry to subtype renal tumors sometimes or occasionally, and a majority (87%) used immunohistochemical markers (Pax 2 or Pax 8, renal cell carcinoma [RCC] marker, panel of pan-CK, CK7, vimentin, and CD10) in confirming the diagnosis of metastatic RCC. There was consensus that immunohistochemistry should be used for histologic subtyping and applied before reaching a diagnosis of unclassified RCC. At the conference, there was consensus that TFE3 and TFEB analysis ought to be requested when RCC was diagnosed in a young patient or when histologic appearances were suggestive of the translocation subtype; whereas Pax 2 and/or Pax 8 were considered to be the most useful markers in the diagnosis of a renal primary.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>by Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</pub><pmid>24025522</pmid><doi>10.1097/PAS.0b013e318299f12e</doi><tpages>14</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0147-5185
ispartof The American journal of surgical pathology, 2013-10, Vol.37 (10), p.1518-1531
issn 0147-5185
1532-0979
language eng
recordid cdi_swepub_primary_oai_swepub_ki_se_526985
source MEDLINE; SWEPUB Freely available online; Journals@Ovid Complete
subjects Biomarkers, Tumor - analysis
Carcinoma, Renal Cell - diagnosis
Carcinoma, Renal Cell - metabolism
Genetics
Humans
Immunohistochemistry - standards
Immunohistochemistry - utilization
Kidney Neoplasms - diagnosis
Kidney Neoplasms - metabolism
Life Sciences
Prognosis
title Renal Tumors: Diagnostic and Prognostic Biomarkers
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-21T18%3A34%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_swepu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Renal%20Tumors:%20Diagnostic%20and%20Prognostic%20Biomarkers&rft.jtitle=The%20American%20journal%20of%20surgical%20pathology&rft.au=Tan,%20Puay%20Hoon&rft.aucorp=ISUP%20Renal%20Tumor%20Panel&rft.date=2013-10&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=1518&rft.epage=1531&rft.pages=1518-1531&rft.issn=0147-5185&rft.eissn=1532-0979&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/PAS.0b013e318299f12e&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_swepu%3E1443398376%3C/proquest_swepu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1443398376&rft_id=info:pmid/24025522&rfr_iscdi=true