The Evaluation of Renal Tumor Diagnostics in Global Pathology Practice
Nazif Alperen Yıldırım, Laila Farid, Dilara Akbulut, Sana Malik, Maryna Slisarenko, Dilek Ertoy Baydar, Manana Jikurashvili, Elza Tjio, Yazgi Koy, Onur Ertunc, Levente Kuthi, Ahmed Montasser, Laurence Galea, Anandi Lobo, Dimitrios Korentzelos, Maria Sarah Lagarde-Lenon, Busra Yaprak Bayrak, Burcu Biltekin, Liang Cheng, Sean R Williamson, Ankur R Sangoi, Mahmut AkgulBackground
The 2022 World Health Organization (WHO) fifth Edition introduced major revisions to renal neoplasm classification, incorporating novel and molecularly defined entities. However, the extent to which these advances are adopted in routine pathology practice remains unclear. This international survey evaluated the global diagnostic work-up of kidney tumors, including access to ancillary tests (immunohistochemistry [IHC], fluorescence in situ hybridization [FISH], next-generation sequencing [NGS]) and familiarity with the current classification.
Methods
A 30-question online survey was distributed via SurveyMonkey to pathologists involved in renal tumor diagnostics between January and July 2024. The survey assessed demographics, practice setting, training background, WHO classification familiarity, and availability of IHC and molecular testing. Responses were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics.
Results
Of 427 respondents, 399 (94.8%) reported encountering kidney tumors and were included, representing 45 countries. The most represented were the United States (18.8%), Egypt (15.8%), Turkey (12.6%), the United Kingdom (8.8%), and India (7.3%). Nearly half (49.4%) had >10 years of practice, 41.1% lacked formal genitourinary pathology training, and 70.7% worked in academic settings. IHC was widely available (96.0%), whereas access to FISH (50.1%) and NGS (43.8%) was limited. High-resource academic centers had significantly greater access to molecular diagnostics than community settings (all
Conclusions
Marked global disparities persist in renal tumor diagnostics. While IHC is widely accessible, advanced molecular tools and novel biomarkers remain unevenly distributed, underscoring the need for targeted educational and resource-sharing strategies.