RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a recently proposed CT-based algorithm for diagnosis of clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) among small (≤ 4 cm) solid renal masses diagnosed by renal mass biopsy. METHODS: This retrospective study included 51 small renal masses in 51 patients with renal-mass CT and biopsy between 2014 and 2021. Three radiologists independently evaluated corticomedullary phase CT for the following: heterogeneity and attenuation ratio (mass:renal cortex), which were used to inform the CT score (1-5). CT score ≥ 4 was considered positive for ccRCC. Diagnostic accuracy was calculated for each reader and overall using fixed effects logistic regression modelling. RESULTS: There were 51% (26/51) ccRCC and 49% (25/51) other masses. For diagnosis of ccRCC, area under curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) were 0.69 (95% confidence interval 0.61-0.76), 78% (68-86%), 59% (46-71%), and 67% (54-79%), respectively. CT score ≤ 2 had a negative predictive value 97% (92-99%) to exclude diagnosis of ccRCC. For diagnosis of papillary renal cell carcinoma (pRCC), CT score ≤ 2, AUC, sensitivity, specificity, and PPV were 0.89 (0.81-0.98), 81% (58-94%), 98% (93-99%), and 85% (62-97%), respectively. Pooled inter-observer agreement for CT scoring was moderate (Fleiss weighted kappa = 0.52). CONCLUSION: The CT scoring system for prediction of ccRCC was sensitive with a high negative predictive value and moderate agreement. The CT score is highly specific for diagnosis of pRCC. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: The CT score algorithm may help guide renal mass biopsy decisions in clinical practice, with high sensitivity to identify clear-cell tumors for biopsy to establish diagnosis and grade and high specificity to avoid biopsy in papillary tumors. KEY POINTS: ⢠A CT score ≥ 4 had high sensitivity and negative predictive value for diagnosis of clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) among solid ≤ 4-cm renal masses. ⢠A CT score ≤ 2 was highly specific for diagnosis of papillary RCC among solid ≤ 4-cm renal masses. ⢠Inter-observer agreement for CT score was moderate.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To determine if CT can differentiate low-grade from high-grade clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) in cT1a solid ccRCC. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This retrospective cross-sectional study evaluated 78 < 4 cm solid (>25% enhancing) ccRCC in 78 patients with renal CT within 12 months of surgery between January 2016 and December 2019. Two radiologists (R1/R2), blinded to pathology, independently recorded mass:size, calcification, attenuation and heterogeneity (5-point Likert scale) and recorded a 5-point ccRCC CT Score. Multivariate logistic regression (LR) was performed. RESULTS: There were 64.1% (50/78) low-grade (5/50 Grade 1 and 45/50 Grade 2) and 35.9% (28/78) high-grade (27/28 Grade 3 and 1/28 Grade 4) tumors.Unenhanced CT attenuation was higher (35.9±10.3 R1 and 34.9±10.7 R2 high-grade vs 29.7±10.2 R1 and 29.5±9.8 R2 low-grade, p=0.01-0.02), absolute corticomedullary phase attenuation ratio (CMphase-ratio; 0.67±0.16 R1 and 0.66±0.16 R2 vs 0.93±0.83 R1 and 0.80±0.33 R2, p=0.04-0.05) and 3-tiered stratification of CMphase-ratio (p=0.02) lower in high-grade tumors.A two-variable LR-model including unenhanced CT attenuation and CM.phase-ratio achieved area under the receiver operator characteristic curve of: 73% (95% confidence intervals 59-86%) and 72% (59-84%) for R1 and R2.ccRCC CT score differed by ccRCC grade (p<0.01 R1, R2) with high-grade tumors occurring most commonly in moderately enhancing ccRCC score 4 (46.4% [13/28] R1 and 54% [15/28]). CONCLUSION: Among cT1a ccRCC, high-grade tumors have higher unenhanced CT attenuation and are less avidly enhancing. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: High-grade ccRCC have higher attenuation (possibly due to less microscopic fat) and lower corticomedullary phase enhancement compared to low-grade tumors. This may result in categorization of high-grade tumors in lower ccRCC diagnostic algorithm categories.