China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Paper 4
Published in Amanda Rabone, Benedict Thomson, Nicky Dineen, Vincent Helyar, Aidan Shaw, The Final FRCR, 2020
Amanda Rabone, Benedict Thomson, Nicky Dineen, Vincent Helyar, Aidan Shaw
The imaging description is of a heterogenous renal lesion with coarse calcification and a central scar. The differential lies between renal cell carcinoma and oncocytoma. Classical imaging characteristics for an oncocytoma include an isoechoic renal mass with a hypoechoic centre on ultrasound. CT of larger lesions such as this one can demonstrate a heterogenous mass and there can be perinephric fat stranding. Both CT and MRI demonstrate the typical non-enhancing central scar. Other MRI features include T1 hypointensity and T2 hyperintensity compared to the renal cortex. In this case an MRI is unlikely to add more information.
Benign Salivary Gland Tumours
Published in John C Watkinson, Raymond W Clarke, Terry M Jones, Vinidh Paleri, Nicholas White, Tim Woolford, Head & Neck Surgery Plastic Surgery, 2018
Oncocytomas are rare tumours. They are predominantly tumours of those over middle age. Women, usually in the seventh or eighth decade, are more likely to be affected. The parotid glands are by far the most frequent site. These tumours are slow growing and may rarely be bilateral. Oncocytomas are benign and excision is curative. There have been occasional reports of recurrences and this is likely to be due to other nodules of tumour tissue in the gland.34
Single best answer (SBA)
Published in Tristan Barrett, Nadeem Shaida, Ashley Shaw, Adrian K. Dixon, Radiology for Undergraduate Finals and Foundation Years, 2018
Tristan Barrett, Nadeem Shaida, Ashley Shaw, Adrian K. Dixon
A patient is found to have a round, well defined 2 cm lesion within the right kidney on ultrasound. On CT the lesion is found to contain fat. What is the most likely diagnosis? Renal cell carcinoma.Oncocytoma.TCC of the kidney.Angiomyolipoma.Renal infarct.
Pathology and systemic therapy of non-clear cell renal cell carcinoma: an overview
Published in Expert Review of Anticancer Therapy, 2021
Lothar Bergmann, Sarah Weber, Arndt Hartmann, Marit Ahrens
Tumors with dominant eosinophilic or oncocytic cytoplasm constitute a specific diagnostic group that does not show specific criteria of malignancy (e.g. tumor cell necrosis, sarcomatoid dedifferentiation, angioinvasion or metastasis). These tumors are difficult to distinguish from classic benign oncocytoma and frequently display a divergence of histological features and immunohistochemical staining results, making them difficult to diagnose. Several new entities have been described in this tumor group, including the CD117-negative and cytokeratin (CK)7-positive low-grade oncocytic tumors (LOT), and the high-grade oncocytic tumor (HOT)/vacuolated eosinophil tumor (VET). Furthermore, some cases have hybrid features of both oncocytoma and ChRCC. New molecular studies demonstrate subgroups of eosinophilic renal tumors to show mutations in the TSC/mTOR signaling pathway with a distinct immune profile. Importantly, these tumors have been proposed to be a specific entity, which would make them a distinct target for possible therapy with mTOR inhibitors. In summary, the diagnostic term ‘oncocytic tumor, NOS’ should be used for these dominant oncocytic tumors without specific diagnosis. Histomorphological and molecular features of this tumor group require further studies.
T cells expanded from renal cell carcinoma display tumor-specific CD137 expression but lack significant IFN-γ, TNF-α or IL-2 production
Published in OncoImmunology, 2021
Saskia D. van Asten, Rosa de Groot, Marleen M. van Loenen, Suzanne M. Castenmiller, Jeroen de Jong, Kim Monkhorst, John B.A.G. Haanen, Derk Amsen, Axel Bex, Robbert M. Spaapen, Monika C. Wolkers
Tumor and spatially distant non-tumor kidney tissue were collected from 20 RCC patients undergoing a nephrectomy from April 2016 to March 2018. Patient 08 was excluded from this study as the collected tumor piece proved too small for isolation of sufficient cell numbers for ex vivo analysis. A patient with oncocytoma (patient 11) was excluded from all analysis because we aimed to analyze malignant material only. From patient 05 we could only collect tumor tissue. This patient was therefore excluded from non-tumor and tumor paired comparisons. For patients 19 and 20, blood accompanying the resected kidney was collected from the transport vehicle. The patient characteristics of the 18 included patients are shown in Table 1. The cohort included 5 female and 13 male patients. 14 Tumors were classified as clear cell carcinoma, three as chromophobe and one as not otherwise specified (NOS). The tumor diameters ranged from 5.2 cm to 16.5 cm. The patient age at time of surgery ranged from 51 to 79, with a mean age of 63. Seven patients were smokers. The study was performed according to the Declaration of Helsinki (seventh revision, 2013), and executed with approval of the Institutional Review Board of the Dutch Cancer Institute (NKI), Amsterdam, the Netherlands (study number CFMPB317). All subjects provided written informed consent for ex vivo analyses of resected tumor material.
Does renal mass biopsy influence multidisciplinary treatment recommendations?
Published in Scandinavian Journal of Urology, 2020
Jennifer M. Lobo, Matthew B. Clements, Daniel P. Bitner, Matthew D. Mikula, Sean W. Noona, Mark I. Sultan, Helen P. Cathro, Drew L. Lambert, Noah S. Schenkman, Tracey L. Krupski
Analysis of patients enrolled from April 2015 and January 2017 revealed a total of 83 unique patients were presented at SRM conference. Table 1 shows the baseline characteristics of patients stratified into biopsy or no biopsy. Thirty-four percent of patients did not have a biopsy. There were no significant differences in demographic information or R.E.N.A.L nephrometry score between the biopsy and non-biopsy groups on univariate comparison. The data depicted in Table 2 represents the patients who underwent a biopsy. We had a total of 67 biopsies; patients who had more than one mass biopsied and those who had the same mass biopsied on separate occasions are included. Fifty percent of core biopsies were ccRCC, and 26% were papillary (n = 15) or chromophobe RCC (n = 2). Overall the diagnostic rate was 86.6%. We identified benign tumors (oncocytoma) in 9% of cases. Eight (11.9%) showed benign parenchyma, atypical cells or fibrosis and were considered non-diagnostic. Fuhrman Grade 1–4 was assigned in 65% of core biopsies showing ccRCC, and the 2-tier grading system (high or low) was assigned in an additional 12%, for a total of 77% that were able to be graded. All repeat biopsies were diagnostic. For patients who had a core biopsy and went on to PN or RN, the histology was concordant in 14/15 (93%). One patient had ccRCC on biopsy and had urothelial carcinoma on RN. Histologic grade was concordant in 8/11 (72%) cases that were graded on the surgical pathology specimen.