Risk of genitourinary malignancy in patients that receive anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy.

OBJECTIVES: Haematuria is a common indication for a urology evaluation. In many cases, its cause is not determined unequivocally, but it does not pose any threat to the patient. However, it can represent the first symptom of urinary tract cancer. BACKGROUND: The present study aimed to compare the risk of urological malignancies in patients with haematuria who received antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy versus those who did not. METHODS: This prospective study included 562 patients with haematuria during the period of 2018‒2021. Among these, 129 patients had macroscopic haematuria. All patients underwent a urinary tract ultrasound, CT with urography, and cystoscopy. Patients with suspected malignancy underwent an appropriate surgical procedure with a pathology examination. Data were analysed with univariate and multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: The incidence rates of malignancies were 21.5 % overall, and 44.2 % and 14.8 % among patients with macroscopic and microscopic haematuria, respectively. Univariate regression showed that the odds of malignancy was significantly higher among patients with antiplatelet therapy compared to patients without antiplatelet therapy (OR: 1.88, 95% CI: 1.14‒3.05). In contrast, anticoagulation therapy did not significantly increase the odds of malignancy compared to no anticoagulation therapy (OR: 1.45, 95% CI: 0.74‒2.69). However, a multiple logistic regression model that included other known risk factors (e.g., sex or age) showed similar odds of malignancy among these patient groups. CONCLUSIONS: Malignancy risk for patients who received anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy was similar to the risk observed in the general population. Antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy were not significant risk factors of urological malignancy in patients with haematuria. The results from the present study will be used in a power analysis for an upcoming multicentre study (Tab. 4, Ref. 17). Text in PDF www.elis.sk Keywords: anticoagulation therapy, antiplatelet therapy, cancer, haematuria, risk factor.

Histologic diversity in chromophobe renal cell carcinoma does not impact survival outcome: A comparative international multi-institutional study.

Predicting the clinical behavior and trajectory of chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (ChRCC) by histologic features has so far proven to be challenging. It is known that ChRCC represents a heterogeneous group of neoplasms demonstrating variable, yet distinctive morphologic and genetic profiles. In this international multi-institutional study, we aimed to assess the impact of histologic diversity in ChRCC (classic/eosinophilic versus rare subtypes) on survival outcome. This is an international multi-institutional matched case-control study including 14 institutions, examining the impact of histologic subtypes of ChRCC on survival outcome. The study group (cases) included 89 rare subtypes of ChRCC. The control group consisted of 70 cases of ChRCC including classic and eosinophilic features, age- and tumor size-matched. Most of the rare subtypes were adenomatoid cystic/pigmented ChRCC (66/89, 74.2%), followed by multicystic ChRCC (10/89, 11.2%), and papillary ChRCC (9/89, 10.1%). In the control group, there were 62 (88.6%) classic and 8 (11.4%) eosinophilic ChRCC. There were no statistically significant differences between the study and control groups for age at diagnosis, gender distribution, tumor size, presence of tumor necrosis, presence of sarcomatoid differentiation, and adverse outcomes. No statistically significant differences were found in clinical outcome between the rare subtypes and classic/eosinophilic groups by tumor size, necrosis, and sarcomatoid differentiation. Further, no statistically significant differences were found in clinical outcome between the two groups, stratified by tumor size, necrosis, and sarcomatoid differentiation. Our findings corroborated previous studies that both sarcomatoid differentiation and tumor necrosis were significantly associated with poor clinical outcome in classic/eosinophilic ChRCC, and this was proven to be true for ChRCC with rare histologic subtypes as well. This study suggests that rare morphologic patterns in ChRCC without other aggressive features play no role in determining the clinical behavior of the tumor.

Small cell variant of chromophobe renal cell carcinoma: Clinicopathologic and molecular-genetic analysis of 10 cases.

The morphologic diversity of chromophobe renal cell carcinoma (ChRCC) is well-known. Aside from typical morphology, pigmented adenomatoid, multicystic and papillary patterns have been described. Ten cases of CHRCC composed of small cell population in various percentages were analysed, using morphologic parameters, immunohistochemistry and next-generation sequencing (NGS) testing. Patients were five males and five females, with age ranging from 40 to 78years. The size of tumors ranged from 2.2 cm to 11 cm (mean 5.17 cm). Small cell component comprised 10 to 80% of the tumor volume, while the remaining was formed by cells with classic ChRCC morphology. The immunohistochemical profile of the small cell component was consistent with typical ChRCC immunophenotype, with CD117 and CK7 positivity. Neuroendocrine markers were negative. Mutations of 13 genes were found: DCIER1, FGFR3, JAK3, SUFO, FAM46C, FANCG, MET, PLCG2, APC, POLE, EPICAM, MUTYH and AR. However, only the PLCG2 mutation is considered pathogenic.The small cell variant of ChRCC further highlights and expand upon existing morphologic heterogeneity spectrum. Recognition of small cell variant of CHRCC is not problematic in tumors, where the "classic" CHRCC component is present. However, in limited material (i.e., core biopsy), this may present a diagnostic challenge. Based on the limited follow-up data available, it appears that the small cell tumor component had no impact on prognosis, since there was no aggressive behavior documented.   Awareness of this unusual pattern and applying additional sections to find classic morphology of ChRCC, as well as excluding neuroendocrine nature by immunohistochemistry, may help resolve difficult cases.

A Comprehensive Commentary on the Multilocular Cystic Renal Neoplasm of Low Malignant Potential: A Urologist's Perspective.

Multilocular cystic renal neoplasm of low malignant potential (MCRNLMP) is a cystic renal tumor with indolent clinical behavior. In most of cases, it is an incidental finding during the examination of other health issues. The true incidence rate is estimated to be between 1.5% and 4% of all RCCs. These lesions are classified according to the Bosniak classification as Bosniak category III. There is a wide spectrum of diagnostic tools that can be utilized in the identification of this tumor, such as computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance (MRI) or contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS). Management choices of these lesions range from conservative approaches, such as clinical follow-up, to surgery. Minimally invasive techniques (i.e., robotic surgery and laparoscopy) are preferred, with an emphasis on nephron sparing surgery, if clinically feasible.

Renal cell carcinomas with tubulopapillary architecture and oncocytic cells: Molecular analysis of 39 difficult tumors to classify.

So-called oncocytic papillary renal cell carcinoma (OPRCC) is a poorly defined variant of papillary renal cell carcinoma. Since its first description, several studies were published with conflicting results, and thus precise definition is lacking. A cohort of 39 PRCCs composed of oncocytic cells were analyzed. Cases were divided into 3 groups based on copy number variation (CNV) pattern. The first group consisted of 23 cases with CNV equal to renal oncocytoma. The second group consisted of 7 cases with polysomy of chromosomes 7 and 17 and the last group of 9 cases included those with variable CNV. Epidemiologic, morphologic and immunohistochemical features varied among the groups. There were not any particular histomorphologic features correlating with any of the genetic subgroups. Further, a combination of morphologic, immunohistochemical, and molecular-genetic features did not allow to precisely predict biologic behavior. Owing to variable CNV pattern in OPRCC, strict adherence to morphology and immunohistochemical profile is recommended, particularly in limited samples (i.e., core biopsy). Applying CNV pattern as a part of a diagnostic algorithm can be potentially misleading. OPRCC is a highly variable group of tumors, which might be misdiagnosed as renal oncocytoma. Using the term OPRCC as a distinct diagnostic entity is, thanks to its high heterogeneity, questionable.