No abstract

Objectives To investigate the sonographic features in Xp11.2 translocation renal cell carcinoma (Xp11.2 tRCC) using both conventional ultrasound (US) and contrast‐enhanced US (CEUS) and evaluate the usefulness of sonographic imaging characteristics to differentiate between Xp11.2 tRCC and the three common RCC subtypes. Methods Thirty‐four adult Xp11.2 tRCC patients who preoperatively underwent both conventional US and CEUS and had solitary renal lesions and pathological confirmation after surgery were enrolled. Control matched patients included 131 with clear cell RCC (ccRCC), 48 with papillary RCC (pRCC), and 35 with chromophobe RCC (chRCC). Conventional US and CEUS data of all patients were retrospectively analyzed and compared. Results Xp11.2 tRCC was more common in young women. The echogenicity of Xp11.2 tRCC lesions was hypo‐ and isoechoic relative to the adjacent renal cortex. A higher frequency of calcification within tumors was detected in Xp11.2 tRCC, but the presence of color flow signal (26.5%, 9/34) was much lower. Regarding CEUS features relative to the adjacent renal cortex, synchronous wash‐in (61.8%, 21/34), iso‐enhancement at peak (55.9%, 19/34), and fast wash‐out (50.0%, 17/34) were more common in Xp11.2 tRCC. Moreover, an integrated variables model based on these features could differentiate Xp11.2 tRCC from ccRCC, pRCC, and chRCC (area under the curve, sensitivity, and specificity: 0.934, 92.0%, and 86.0%; 0.907, 88.0%, and 87.0%; and 0.808, 65.0%, and 99.0%, respectively). Conclusions Combining conventional US and CEUS lesion features with clinical information may provide a feasible and effective method to differentiate Xp11.2 tRCC from ccRCC, pRCC, and chRCC.

No abstract

BackgroundXp11.2 translocation renal cell carcinoma (Xp11.2 tRCC) is a group of rare and highly heterogeneous renal cell carcinoma (RCC). The translocation involving TFE3 and different fusion partners lead to overexpression of the chimeric protein. The purpose of this study is to explore the clinicopathological features of Xp11.2 tRCC with four common fusion subtypes.MethodsWe screened out 40 Xp11.2 tRCC patients from January 2007 to August 2021 in our institution. The diagnosis was initially confirmed by TFE3 immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) assay and their fusion partners were verified by RNA sequencing. Then the 40 cases were divided into two groups (DBHS family and non-DBHS family group) and a clinical comparison among the four common fusion subtypes was performed.ResultsAmong the 40 cases, 11 cases with SFPQ-TFE3 gene fusion and 7 cases with NONO-TFE3 gene fusion were classified in DBHS group, the remaining cases with ASPL-TFE3 (11 cases) or PRCC-TFE3 (11 cases) gene fusion were classified in non-DBHS group. Lymph node (LN) metastasis (P=0.027) and distant metastasis (P=0.009) were more common seen in non-DBHS family group than DBHS family group and cases in DBHS family group have better progressive-free survival (PFS) (P=0.02). In addition, ASPL-TFE3 fusion was associated with worse outcome (P=0.03) while NONO-TFE3 fusion (P=0.04) predicted a better prognosis.ConclusionsDifferent fusion partner genes may play a functional role in various morphology, molecular and biological features of Xp11.2 tRCCs. The impact of fusion partners on clinical characteristics of Xp11.2 tRCCs deserves further exploration.

Objective The objective was to derive and validate a practical scoring system for preoperative diagnosis of Xp11.2 translocation renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in adults. Methods Epidemiology, symptomatology, and imaging methods were correlated between patients with common RCC and those with Xp11.2 translocation RCC using a derivation study (N = 6352) and a validation study (N = 127). Univariate analysis of risk factors was performed to derive a scoring system to predict the occurrence of Xp11.2 translocation RCC in adults. The Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were used to validate the scoring system. Results Based on odd ratios, three low-risk factors (sex, gross haematuria, and intratumoural calcification) and three high-risk factors (age, unenhanced computed tomography density, and enhancement pattern) were given weighted scores of 1 and 2, respectively. Patients who scored 3 to 5 points underwent an additional magnetic resonance imaging examination. The final scoring system had a sensitivity of 81.0% and a specificity of 98.0%. Conclusion We established a practical scoring system for the preoperative diagnosis of Xp11.2 translocation RCC in adults, which can be optimised through further clinical findings in the future.