Scinovex
articleTop 1% cited

The International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) Grading System for Renal Cell Carcinoma and Other Prognostic Parameters

The American Journal of Surgical Pathology · 2013 · Vol. 37(10) · pp. 1490–1504
Brett DelahuntJohn C. ChevilleGuido MartignoniPeter A. HumphreyCristina Magi‐GalluzziJesse K. McKenneyLars EgevadFerrán AlgabaHolger MochDavid J. GrignonRodolfo MontironiJohn R. Srigley

Abstract

The International Society of Urological Pathology 2012 Consensus Conference made recommendations regarding classification, prognostic factors, staging, and immunohistochemical and molecular assessment of adult renal tumors. Issues relating to prognostic factors were coordinated by a workgroup who identified tumor morphotype, sarcomatoid/rhabdoid differentiation, tumor necrosis, grading, and microvascular invasion as potential prognostic parameters. There was consensus that the main morphotypes of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) were of prognostic significance, that subtyping of papillary RCC (types 1 and 2) provided additional prognostic information, and that clear cell tubulopapillary RCC was associated with a more favorable outcome. For tumors showing sarcomatoid or rhabdoid differentiation, there was consensus that a minimum proportion of tumor was not required for diagnostic purposes. It was also agreed upon that the underlying subtype of carcinoma should be reported. For sarcomatoid carcinoma, it was further agreed upon that if the underlying carcinoma subtype was absent the tumor should be classified as a grade 4 unclassified carcinoma with a sarcomatoid component. Tumor necrosis was considered to have prognostic significance, with assessment based on macroscopic and microscopic examination of the tumor. It was recommended that for clear cell RCC the amount of necrosis should be quantified. There was consensus that nucleolar prominence defined grades 1 to 3 of clear cell and papillary RCCs, whereas extreme nuclear pleomorphism or sarcomatoid and/or rhabdoid differentiation defined grade 4 tumors. It was agreed upon that chromophobe RCC should not be graded. There was consensus that microvascular invasion should not be included as a staging criterion for RCC.

Renal cell carcinoma treatmentRenal and related cancersBladder and Urothelial Cancer TreatmentsGrading (engineering)PathologyMedicineRenal cell carcinomaClear cellSarcomatoid carcinomaCarcinomaCytopathologyPleomorphism (cytology)Hematopathology

MeSH terms

Carcinoma, Renal CellHumansKidney NeoplasmsPrognosisSocieties, MedicalNeoplasm Grading
Citations
842
FWCI
36.49
field-weighted impact
References
117
Percentile
100%
vs. same field & year
Citations per year
Citation Network

How this paper connects to the literature. Drag to explore, click any node to open that paper.