Lin Haiyue, Wang Caiying, Zhao Yun, Wang Run, Xi Wei, Xiong Ying, Xiao Li, Liu Yi, Zhang Shaoting, Dai Chenchen
Department of Pathology, Xuzhou Medical University Affiliated Hospital of Lianyungang, Lianyungang, China.
Department of Pathology, Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
World J Urol. 2024 Dec 23;43(1):45. doi: 10.1007/s00345-024-05394-3.
Traditional grading systems have proven inadequate in stratifying chRCC patients based on recurrence risk. Recently, several novel grading schemes, including three-tiered, two-tiered, and four-tiered systems, have been proposed, but their prognostic value remains controversial and lacks external validation.
We included 528 patients with pathologically proven chRCC (chromophobe renal cell carcinoma) from multiple medical institutions and the Cancer Genome Atlas-Kidney Chromophobe cohort. Three experienced pathologists independently reassessed the slides based on the three novel grading schemes. Survival outcomes, including disease-specific survival (DSS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox proportional hazards regression models. The prognostic value of the original and adjusted Leibovich risk groups was compared using Harrell's C-index.
All grading systems demonstrated significant survival differences among their respective groups (p < 0.001 for all). However, within the four-tiered system, no significant survival disparity was observed between grade 1 and grade 2 tumors (GTG2 without necrosis) (p = 0.619 for DSS). When patients with necrosis were excluded, no survival difference was detected between CTG1 and CTG2 tumors in the three-tiered system (p = 0.870 for DSS), challenging the prognostic utility of distinguishing between these two grades. The adjusted Leibovich risk stratification (C-index = 0.840 for DSS), incorporating necrosis and tumor thrombus, demonstrated superior prognostic value compared to the original model (C-index = 0.762 for DSS), with more pronounced survival distinctions and improved predictive performance.
Our study validates the prognostic significance of recently developed grading systems for chRCC. The observed survival difference between CTG1 and CTG2 in the three-tiered system may be attributed to varying percentages of coagulative necrosis. By integrating necrosis and tumor thrombus into the Leibovich risk groups, we enhanced the model's ability to distinguish between patients and improved its predictive performance.
传统的分级系统已被证明在根据复发风险对肾嫌色细胞癌(chRCC)患者进行分层方面存在不足。最近,已经提出了几种新的分级方案,包括三级、二级和四级系统,但它们的预后价值仍存在争议且缺乏外部验证。
我们纳入了来自多个医疗机构和癌症基因组图谱 - 肾嫌色细胞队列的528例经病理证实的肾嫌色细胞癌患者。三位经验丰富的病理学家根据三种新的分级方案独立重新评估切片。使用Kaplan - Meier方法和Cox比例风险回归模型分析生存结果,包括疾病特异性生存(DSS)、无复发生存(RFS)。使用Harrell's C指数比较原始和调整后的Leibovich风险组的预后价值。
所有分级系统在各自的组间均显示出显著的生存差异(所有p < 0.001)。然而,在四级系统中,1级和2级肿瘤(无坏死的GTG2)之间未观察到显著的生存差异(DSS的p = 0.619)。当排除有坏死的患者时,在三级系统中CTG1和CTG2肿瘤之间未检测到生存差异(DSS的p = 0.870),这对区分这两个级别的预后效用提出了挑战。纳入坏死和肿瘤血栓的调整后的Leibovich风险分层(DSS的C指数 = 0.840)与原始模型(DSS的C指数 = 0.762)相比,显示出更好的预后价值,具有更明显的生存差异和改进的预测性能。
我们的研究验证了最近开发的肾嫌色细胞癌分级系统的预后意义。在三级系统中观察到的CTG1和CTG2之间的生存差异可能归因于凝固性坏死的不同百分比。通过将坏死和肿瘤血栓纳入Leibovich风险组,我们提高了模型区分患者的能力并改善了其预测性能。