Abstract
Background Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) comprises of a spectrum of clinico-pathologically distinct entities thereby making it difficult to accurately predict the clinical outcome. Though many predictive factors have been described in literature, tumor stage and nuclear grade have been established to consistently correlate with the tumor behaviour. However, tumors in the same stage have shown to behave differently. Similarly subjectivity and lack of reproducibility in nuclear grade mandates use of more objective parameters such as digital nuclear morphometry which could provide consistent and more reliable results in predicting prognosis. The study was conducted with the main objective of comparing the histological grade and the nuclear morphometric variables in RCC for predicting the clinical outcome.
Material and methods A total of 219 cases of renal tumors in adults were retrieved retrospectively from the archives of pathology department in Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow and their clinical, gross and microscopic features were noted. Nuclear grading was done in 181 cases of clear cell and papillary RCC of which computer-assisted morphometry for various nuclear parameters was done in 100 cases where a follow-up data of at least 3 years was available. Nuclear grade and morphometric parameters were correlated statistically with the clinical outcome of the patients.
Results Histological nuclear grade did not show statistically significant correlation with progression free survival (PFS). Higher values of mean nuclear area, mean nuclear circumference, mean nuclear major diameter and mean nuclear minor diameter were significant predictors of PFS with a strong inverse correlation.
Conclusion Nuclear morphometry is a more reliable predictor of clinical outcome in patients of RCC when compared to histological grade and should be included in predictive model with other clinical and pathological parameters to accurately determine tumor behaviour.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
None
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study was done as a part of thesis at Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of medical sciences (SGPGIMS), Lucknow and the ethical clearance was taken by Institutional Ethics Committee, SGPGMIS, Lucknow. The ethical clearance was granted by the committee. Currently the affiliation of the authors have changed to AIIMS Rishikesh.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All the data mentioned in the text has been provided in the tables.
