Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Diagnostic performance of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the differentiation of clear cell renal cell cancer

  • Kidneys, Ureters, Bladder, Retroperitoneum
  • Published:
Abdominal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) in the differentiation of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) subtypes.

Methods

This is a retrospective diagnostic performance study, in which the diagnostic performances of mpMRI features were evaluated to differentiate clear cell RCC (ccRCC) from non-clear cell RCC (non-ccRCC). Adult patients who were evaluated using a 3-Tesla dynamic contrast-enhanced mpMRI before undergoing partial or radical nephrectomy for possible malignant renal tumors were included in the study. Signal intensity change percentages (SICP) between contrast-enhanced phases and pre-administration period for both the tumor and normal renal cortex, and tumor-to-cortex enhancement index (TCEI); tumor apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values; tumor-to-cortex ADC ratio; and a scale which was developed according to the tumor signal intensities on the axial fat-suppressed T2-weighted Half-Fourier Acquisition Single-shot Turbo spin Echo (HASTE) images were used in ROC analysis to estimate the presence of ccRCC in the patients. The reference test positivity was the histopathologic examination of the surgical specimens.

Results

Ninety-eight tumors from 91 patients were included in the study, and 59 of them were ccRCC, 29 were pRCC, and 10 were chRCC. The mpMRI features that had the three highest sensitivity rates were excretory phase SICP, T2-weighted HASTE scale score, and corticomedullary phase TCEI (93.2%, 91.5%, and 86.4%, respectively). However, those with the three highest specificity rates were nephrographic phase TCEI, excretory phase TCEI, and tumor ADC value (94.9%, 94.9%, and 89.7%, respectively).

Conclusion

Several parameters on mpMRI showed an acceptable performance to differentiate ccRCC from non-ccRCC.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data of the study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Gurel S, Narra V, Elsayes KM, Siegel CL, Chen ZE, Brown JJ (2013) Subtypes of renal cell carcinoma: MRI and pathological features. Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology. https://doi.org/10.5152/dir.2013.147

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A (2022) Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin 72 (1):7-33. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21708

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sun MR, Ngo L, Genega EM, Atkins MB, Finn ME, Rofsky NM, Pedrosa I (2009) Renal cell carcinoma: dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging for differentiation of tumor subtypes--correlation with pathologic findings. Radiology 250 (3):793-802. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2503080995

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Pal SK, Tangen C, Thompson IM, Jr., Balzer-Haas N, George DJ, Heng DYC, Shuch B, Stein M, Tretiakova M, Humphrey P, Adeniran A, Narayan V, Bjarnason GA, Vaishampayan U, Alva A, Zhang T, Cole S, Plets M, Wright J, Lara PN, Jr. (2021) A comparison of sunitinib with cabozantinib, crizotinib, and savolitinib for treatment of advanced papillary renal cell carcinoma: a randomised, open-label, phase 2 trial. Lancet 397 (10275):695-703. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(21)00152-5

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Escudier B, Porta C, Schmidinger M, Rioux-Leclercq N, Bex A, Khoo V, Grunwald V, Gillessen S, Horwich A, clinicalguidelines@esmo.org EGCEa (2019) Renal cell carcinoma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-updagger. Ann Oncol 30 (5):706-720. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdz056

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Powles T, clinicalguidelines@esmo.org EGCEa (2021) Recent eUpdate to the ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines on renal cell carcinoma on cabozantinib and nivolumab for first-line clear cell renal cancer: Renal cell carcinoma: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 32 (3):422-423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2020.11.016

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Powles T, Albiges L, Bex A, Grunwald V, Porta C, Procopio G, Schmidinger M, Suarez C, de Velasco G, clinicalguidelines@esmo.org EGCEa (2021) ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline update on the use of immunotherapy in early stage and advanced renal cell carcinoma. Ann Oncol 32 (12):1511-1519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2021.09.014

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Xi IL, Zhao Y, Wang R, Chang M, Purkayastha S, Chang K, Huang RY, Silva AC, Vallieres M, Habibollahi P, Fan Y, Zou B, Gade TP, Zhang PJ, Soulen MC, Zhang Z, Bai HX, Stavropoulos SW (2020) Deep Learning to Distinguish Benign from Malignant Renal Lesions Based on Routine MR Imaging. Clin Cancer Res 26 (8):1944-1952. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-19-0374

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Silverman SG, Gan YU, Mortele KJ, Tuncali K, Cibas ES (2006) Renal masses in the adult patient: the role of percutaneous biopsy. Radiology 240 (1):6-22. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2401050061

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hu R, Montemayor-Garcia C, Das K (2015) Role of percutaneous needle core biopsy in diagnosis and clinical management of renal masses. Hum Pathol 46 (4):570-576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2014.12.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Pedrosa I, Chou MT, Ngo L, Baroni RH, Genega EM, Galaburda L, DeWolf WC, Rofsky NM (2008) MR classification of renal masses with pathologic correlation. Eur Radiol 18 (2):365-375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-007-0757-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ramamurthy NK, Moosavi B, McInnes MD, Flood TA, Schieda N (2015) Multiparametric MRI of solid renal masses: pearls and pitfalls. Clin Radiol 70 (3):304-316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2014.10.006

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Zhu J, Luo X, Gao J, Li S, Li C, Chen M (2021) Application of diffusion kurtosis tensor MR imaging in characterization of renal cell carcinomas with different pathological types and grades. Cancer Imaging 21 (1):30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40644-021-00394-7

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Braunagel M, Graser A, Reiser M, Notohamiprodjo M (2014) The role of functional imaging in the era of targeted therapy of renal cell carcinoma. World J Urol 32 (1):47-58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-013-1074-7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cohen JF, Korevaar DA, Altman DG, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Hooft L, Irwig L, Levine D, Reitsma JB, de Vet HCW, Bossuyt PMM (2016) STARD 2015 guidelines for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies: explanation and elaboration. BMJ Open 6 (11):e012799. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012799

  16. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL (1988) Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 44 (3):837-845

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lopes Vendrami C, Parada Villavicencio C, DeJulio TJ, Chatterjee A, Casalino DD, Horowitz JM, Oberlin DT, Yang GY, Nikolaidis P, Miller FH (2017) Differentiation of Solid Renal Tumors with Multiparametric MR Imaging. Radiographics 37 (7):2026-2042. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2017170039

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Cohan RH, Ellis JH (2015) Renal Masses: Imaging Evaluation. Radiol Clin North Am 53 (5):985-1003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcl.2015.05.003

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Furrer MA, Spycher SCJ, Büttiker SM, Gross T, Bosshard P, Thalmann GN, Schneider MP, Roth B (2020) Comparison of the Diagnostic Performance of Contrast-enhanced Ultrasound with That of Contrast-enhanced Computed Tomography and Contrast-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Evaluation of Renal Masses: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol 3 (4):464-473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2019.08.013

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Young JR, Coy H, Kim HJ, Douek M, Lo P, Pantuck AJ, Raman SS (2017) Performance of Relative Enhancement on Multiphasic MRI for the Differentiation of Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) From Papillary and Chromophobe RCC Subtypes and Oncocytoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 208 (4):812-819. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.16.17152

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Li SR, Pui MH, Guo Y, Wang HJ, Guan J, Zhang XL, Pan WB (2018) Efficacy of 3D VIBE Dixon fat quantification for differentiating clear-cell from non-clear-cell renal cell carcinoma. Clin Radiol 73 (11):975-980. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crad.2018.06.018

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Yoshida R, Yoshizako T, Hisatoshi A, Mori H, Tamaki Y, Ishikawa N, Kitagaki H (2017) The additional utility of apparent diffusion coefficient values of clear-cell renal cell carcinoma for predicting metastasis during clinical staging. Acta Radiol Open 6 (1):2058460116687174. https://doi.org/10.1177/2058460116687174

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Yu X, Lin M, Ouyang H, Zhou C, Zhang H (2012) Application of ADC measurement in characterization of renal cell carcinomas with different pathological types and grades by 3.0T diffusion-weighted MRI. Eur J Radiol 81 (11):3061–3066. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.04.028

  24. Kılıçarslan G, Eroğlu Y, Kılıçarslan A (2022) Application of different methods used to measure the apparent diffusion coefficient of renal cell carcinoma on the same lesion and its correlation with ISUP nuclear grading. Abdom Radiol (NY) 47 (7):2442-2452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-022-03541-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Campbell N, Rosenkrantz AB, Pedrosa I (2014) MRI phenotype in renal cancer: is it clinically relevant? Top Magn Reson Imaging 23 (2):95-115. https://doi.org/10.1097/RMR.0000000000000019

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Kim JH, Sun HY, Hwang J, Hong SS, Cho YJ, Doo SW, Yang WJ, Song YS (2016) Diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced computed tomography and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of small renal masses in real practice: sensitivity and specificity according to subjective radiologic interpretation. World J Surg Oncol 14 (1):260. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-016-1017-z

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Takeuchi M, Froemming AT, Kawashima A, Thapa P, Carter RE, Cheville JC, Thompson RH, Takahashi N (2022) Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) helps differentiate renal cell carcinoma with sarcomatoid differentiation from renal cell carcinoma without sarcomatoid differentiation. Abdom Radiol (NY) 47 (6):2168-2177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-022-03501-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Vargas HA, Chaim J, Lefkowitz RA, Lakhman Y, Zheng J, Moskowitz CS, Sohn MJ, Schwartz LH, Russo P, Akin O (2012) Renal cortical tumors: use of multiphasic contrast-enhanced MR imaging to differentiate benign and malignant histologic subtypes. Radiology 264 (3):779-788. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12110746

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Goyal A, Sharma R, Bhalla AS, Gamanagatti S, Seth A, Iyer VK, Das P (2012) Diffusion-weighted MRI in renal cell carcinoma: a surrogate marker for predicting nuclear grade and histological subtype. Acta Radiol 53 (3):349-358. https://doi.org/10.1258/ar.2011.110415

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Wang H, Cheng L, Zhang X, Wang D, Guo A, Gao Y, Ye H (2010) Renal cell carcinoma: diffusion-weighted MR imaging for subtype differentiation at 3.0 T. Radiology 257 (1):135–143. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.10092396

  31. Sandrasegaran K, Sundaram CP, Ramaswamy R, Akisik FM, Rydberg MP, Lin C, Aisen AM (2010) Usefulness of diffusion-weighted imaging in the evaluation of renal masses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194 (2):438-445. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.09.3024

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was received for conducting this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Trabzon Ahi Evren Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Training and Research Hospital, Trabzon, Turkey

    Cemal Aydoğan

  2. Department of Radiology, Karadeniz Technical University Faculty of Medicine, Trabzon, Turkey

    Ayşegül Cansu, Zeynep Aydoğan & Onur Bektaş

  3. Department of Radiology, Tokat State Hospital, Tokat, Turkey

    Sinan Erdemi

  4. Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Turkey

    Aykut Teymur

  5. Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Turkey

    Sevdegül Mungan

  6. Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Karadeniz Technical University, Trabzon, Turkey

    İlke Onur Kazaz

Authors
  1. Cemal Aydoğan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ayşegül Cansu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zeynep Aydoğan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sinan Erdemi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Aykut Teymur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Onur Bektaş
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Sevdegül Mungan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. İlke Onur Kazaz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by CA, ZA, and AC. The first draft of the manuscript was written by CA and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cemal Aydoğan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Ethical approval

Ethics approval was obtained from Karadeniz Technical University Medical Faculty Scientific Research Ethics Committee (Ethical Approval No. 2020/317, and approval date: 21.12.2020).

Informed consent

Because of the retrospective nature of the study, informed consent was waived, and this issue was approved by the Ethics Committee.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aydoğan, C., Cansu, A., Aydoğan, Z. et al. Diagnostic performance of multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging in the differentiation of clear cell renal cell cancer. Abdom Radiol 48, 2349–2360 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-023-03882-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-023-03882-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation