E-submission
Search
- Page Path
- HOME > Search
Original Articles
- Correlation between Nuclear Grades and the Numbers of AgNORs and PCNA Labeling Indices in Renal Cell Carcinoma.
- Hye Jin Lee, Young Im Han, Kang Suek Suh, Sun Kyung Lee
- Korean J Pathol. 1996;30(2):132-139.
- 1,338 View
- 11 Download
-
Abstract
PDF - The author examined the number of AgNORs and PCNA labeling indices by histochemical and immunohistochemical studies in 20 cases of renal cell carcinoma, composed of 5 cases according to the nuclear grades. The results obtained are summarized as follows; 1) Mean number of AgNORs according to the nuclear grades of renal cell carcinoma were 1.38+/-0.40 (mean+/-standard deviation) for Grade I, 2.53+/-0.33 for Grade II, 5.43+/-0.66 for Grade III, and 7.88+/-0.72 for Grade IV. The mean numbers of AgNORs according to the nuclear grades were significantly increased(p=0.0005). 2) PCNA labeling indices (positive nuclear ratio) according to the nuclear grades of renal cell carcinoma were 5.90+/-2.36 for Grade I, 19.30+/-6.71 for Grade II, 45.73+/-8.62 for Grade III, and 61.83+/-6.34 for Grade IV. Also, the PCNA labeling indices according to the nuclear grades were significantly increased(p=0.0008). 3) The mean numbers of AgNORs directly correlated with the PCNA labeling indices (r=0.9861, p<0.001). On the basis of the above results, it was considered that the numbers of AgNORs and PCNA labeling indices as markers of proliferative activity of tumor cells correlate well with the nuclear grades of renal cell carcinoma.
- Correlation of Clinical Stage and Presumptive Prognostic Factors in Renal Cell Carcinoma.
- Jin Ye Yoo, Hye Jae Cho
- Korean J Pathol. 1999;33(11):1061-1066.
- 1,509 View
- 10 Download
-
Abstract
PDF
- Renal cell carcinoma is the most common primary cancer of the kidney. The tumor stage is a reliable prognostic marker in renal cell carcinoma which is significantly associated with patient survival. But assessment of other prognostic factors has produced varying and often conflicting results. We reevaluated the significance of varied prognostic parameters in 33 cases of renal cell carcinoma; clinical stage, cell type, histologic pattern, DNA ploidy, Ki-67 labeling index, and bcl-2 oncoprotein expression. We could not statistically prove that DNA ploidy and bcl-2 expression were related to any examined parameters. Cell type was not related to clinical stage nor nuclear grade but there was a significant correlation (p=0.002) between cell type and histologic pattern. Nuclear grade (p=0.007) and Ki-67 labeling index (p=0.036) were significantly related to clinical stage, suggesting their value as complementary prognostic markers for renal cell carcinoma.
- A Pathological Study of Renal Cell Carcinoma.
- Kwang Hwa Park, Dong Hwan Shin, In Joon Choi
- Korean J Pathol. 1989;23(3):322-330.
- 1,696 View
- 14 Download
-
Abstract
PDF
- The most common malignant renal neoplasm is renal cell carcinoma. It is estimated that renal cell carcinoma accounts for 1% of all primary malignancies in Korea. Rell cell carcinoma presents diverse clinical courses with gross, histopathologic features. It has been known to be very difficult tumor to predict its clinical prognosis. In Korea, many studies have been reported concerning the clinical aspects of renal cell carcinoma. However, pathological studies of renal cell carcinoma are very few even though studies of nuclear grade have been attempted recently. We reviewed 93 cases of renal cell carcinoma examined in the period from 1978 to 1987 in the department of pathology, Yonsei university college of medicine, Yongdong Severance hospital, Wonju college of medicine and analyzed the histopathologic classification, including nuclear grade according to the Fuhrman's method. We abtained the following results by studying the relationship of the factors which had been known as correlated with the prognosis. 1) The ages of patients ranged from 9 to 74 years with a peak in the 6th decade. 2) The most common symptoms of the patients were hematuria, mass and pain, in that oder, and 7 patients complained to specific symptoms. The incidentally found cases characterized stage I, nuclear grade 2 small tumor size (not more than 4 cm) and clear cell type. 3) The renal cell carcinoma was more frequently located in the left kidney than the right by a ratio of 1.25 : 1. The incidence of intrarenal location was divided to the upper pole, 40% : mid portion, 29% : lower pole, 23% : diffuse involvement, 8%. The tumor shoing diffuse growth pattern had a large size, high nuclear grade and mixed cells. 4) The tumor size averaged 8 cm and there was no significant relationship between the size and stage. Seven cases of neoplasms not more than 3 cm were seen, of which 2 cases revealed an outcome of distant metastasis. 5) The histological pattern showed major solid, 53% : tubular, 11% : mixed, 18% : papillary, 9% and sarcomatoid type 9%. The sarcomatoid type was characterized by grade 4, a larger size(more than 10 cm), advanced stage. 6) There was no special relationship between the stage and grade but mostly grade 2 occupied the stage I. 7) The clear cell type was predominantly noted at grade 2 (65%), at the stage I (63%), granular or mixed cell type at grade 3 (87%), 4 (70%). According to these results, the tumors showing a sarcomatoid histologic pattern, diffuse growth pattern had unfavorable prognostic factors, and are thus estimated to have a poor prognosis. But the case which were incidentally found have favorable prognostic factors and probably a better prognosis. The tumor size alone can not exactly predict the metastasis and is not correlated with the stage. Small renal cell neoplasm (not more than 3 cm) generally has unfavorable prognostic factors and should be considered potentially malignant. The high grade frequently has granular cytoplasm. This represents the relationship between grade and cytoplasm, poor prognosis in the granular cell than the clear. The renal cell carcinoma shows variable prognosis and thus the prognosis should be estimated by all the factors. Nuclear grade can be used as one of the useful prognostic factors.
First
Prev
