What is the significance of microvascular tumor invasion observed in a renal cell carcinoma?


The possible prognostic significance of intratumoral microvascular invasion by tumor cells has been mentioned sporadically over the past decade. All reports have determined that it is an adverse factor that negatively affects tumor recurrence or cancer-specific death. Its frequency is closely related to tumor size, Fuhrman nuclear grade, and pathologic stage. The presence of microvascular invasion may be more meaningful in predicting the prognosis in a low-stage, low nuclear grade tumor. For the pathologist, the presence (or absence) of tumor thrombus in a renal cancer mass should be stated in the pathology report. The ability to invade an intratumoral vessel must be a manifestation of aggressive biologic potential even for a tumor that is removed at an early stage of growth that is presumed to carry a favorable prognosis.


Nuclear Grade Tumor Thrombus Microvascular Invasion Microscopic Vascular Invasion Intratumoral Vessel 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Van Poppel H, Vandendriessche H, Boel K, Mertens V, Goethuys H, Haustermans K, Van Damme B, Baert L (1997) Microscopic vascular invasion is the most relevant prognosticator after radical nephrectomy for clinically nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 158:45–49.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Goncalves PD, Srougi M, Dall’Oglio F, Leite MKR, Ortiz V, Hering F (2004) Low clinical stage renal cell carcinoma: relevance of microvascular tumor invasion as a prognostic parameter. J Urol 172:470–474.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Samma S, Yoshida K, Ozono S, Ohara S, Hayashi Y, Tabata S, Uemura H, Iwai A, Hirayama A, Hirao Y, Okajima E (1991) Tumor thrombus and microvascular invasion as prognostic factors in renal cell carcinoma. Jpn J Clin Oncol 21:340–345.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mrstik C, Salamon J, Weber R, Stögermayer F (1992) Microscopic venous infiltration as predictor of relapse in renal cell carcinoma. J Urol 148:271–274.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kinouchi T, Saiki S, Meguro N, Maeda O, Kuroda M, Usami M, Kotake T (1999) Impact of tumor size on the clinical outcomes of patients with Robson stage I renal cell carcinoma. Cancer 85:689–695.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fuhrman SA, Lasky LC, Limas C (1982) Prognostic significance of morphologic parameters in renal cell carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 6:655–663.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jiang Z, Chu PG, Woda BA, Rock KL, Liu Q, Hsieh C-C, Li C, Chen W, Duan HQ, McDougal S, Wu C-L (2006) Analysis of RNA-binding protein IMP3 to predict metastasis and progression of renal-cell carcinoma: retrospective study. Lancet Oncol 7:556–564.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2008

Personalised recommendations