The International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grading system for renal cell carcinoma and other prognostic parameters

Brett Delahunt, John C Cheville, Guido Martignoni, Peter A Humphrey, Cristina Magi-Galluzzi, Jesse McKenney, Lars Egevad, Ferran Algaba, Holger Moch, David J Grignon, Rodolfo Montironi, John R Srigley, Members of the ISUP Renal Tumor Panel, Marie O'Donnell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract / Description of output

The International Society of Urological Pathology 2012 Consensus Conference made recommendations regarding classification, prognostic factors, staging, and immunohistochemical and molecular assessment of adult renal tumors. Issues relating to prognostic factors were coordinated by a workgroup who identified tumor morphotype, sarcomatoid/rhabdoid differentiation, tumor necrosis, grading, and microvascular invasion as potential prognostic parameters. There was consensus that the main morphotypes of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) were of prognostic significance, that subtyping of papillary RCC (types 1 and 2) provided additional prognostic information, and that clear cell tubulopapillary RCC was associated with a more favorable outcome. For tumors showing sarcomatoid or rhabdoid differentiation, there was consensus that a minimum proportion of tumor was not required for diagnostic purposes. It was also agreed upon that the underlying subtype of carcinoma should be reported. For sarcomatoid carcinoma, it was further agreed upon that if the underlying carcinoma subtype was absent the tumor should be classified as a grade 4 unclassified carcinoma with a sarcomatoid component. Tumor necrosis was considered to have prognostic significance, with assessment based on macroscopic and microscopic examination of the tumor. It was recommended that for clear cell RCC the amount of necrosis should be quantified. There was consensus that nucleolar prominence defined grades 1 to 3 of clear cell and papillary RCCs, whereas extreme nuclear pleomorphism or sarcomatoid and/or rhabdoid differentiation defined grade 4 tumors. It was agreed upon that chromophobe RCC should not be graded. There was consensus that microvascular invasion should not be included as a staging criterion for RCC.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1490-504
Number of pages15
JournalThe American Journal of Surgical Pathology
Volume37
Issue number10
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2013

Keywords / Materials (for Non-textual outputs)

  • Carcinoma, Renal Cell
  • Humans
  • Kidney Neoplasms
  • Neoplasm Grading
  • Prognosis
  • Societies, Medical

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grading system for renal cell carcinoma and other prognostic parameters'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this