What Does the Urologist Expect from the Pathologist (and What Can the Pathologists Give) in Reporting on Adult Kidney Tumour Specimens?
Kirkali, Ziya × Algaba, Ferran Scarpelli, Marina Trias, Isabel Selvaggi, Francesco P Van Poppel, Hendrik #
European Urology vol:51 issue:5 pages:1194-1201
OBJECTIVE: To identify the parameters required by the urologist to determine the prognosis and the treatment of renal cancer in adults, and to establish the potential therapeutic targets of the new treatments that started to show clinical efficacy. METHODS: A literature search of the last 10 yr was done, paying specific attention to TNM 2002 (UICC staging) and Fuhrman's grading. Also, the main genetic characteristics of the different subtypes (according to the WHO 2004 classification) with potential therapeutic implications have been compiled. RESULTS: After the review of the literature, the opinion of the joint meeting including urologists and pathologists is that some aspects of the TNM 2002 classification must be refined. Criteria for nuclear grading should be different for the subtypes of renal cell carcinoma, and the WHO 2004 histological classification is clinically useful. CONCLUSIONS: In the workshop held in Palermo, common opinion was achieved on a number of points. The TNM 2002 classification is useful, but some adjustments should be made, particularly as referred to the tumour size cut-off, assessment of the invasion of the renal sinus fat tissue, and invasion of the ipsilateral adrenal gland. The Fuhrman's grading system is useful in clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC), and probably also in papillary RCC, but a redefinition for chromophobe RCC is needed. Finally, the determination of certain markers, such as VEGF and HIF, could constitute good target markers for the new therapies, but they remain under investigation.