Renal medullary carcinoma: a systematic review of clinical and radiological findings.

Int Urol NephrolApr 9, 2026 (epub)
Clinical ResearchOncology (Medical)UrologyOpen access

William Weston, Cherry Sit, Derfel Ap Dafydd et al.

✦ AI-curated · Sources linked

In 30 seconds

This systematic review summarised clinical, pathological and radiological findings in published renal medullary carcinoma (RMC) cases from 1995 to 2024, including five previously unreported institutional cases. Among 219 published cases, 88% of patients with reported sickle cell status had sickle cell haemoglobinopathy; those patients presented younger than patients without it (27.3 ± 13.7 versus 34.1 ± 19.1 years, p = 0.001). Most cases were advanced at diagnosis: 70.9% were stage IV. Three-year overall survival was 74% for stage I-II, 23% for stage III and 9% for stage IV disease.

Key findings

  • Sickle cell haemoglobinopathy was present in 88% of patients with reported status (n = 168/192).
  • Patients with sickle cell haemoglobinopathy presented younger than those without it: 27.3 ± 13.7 versus 34.1 ± 19.1 years, p = 0.001.
  • At presentation, 70.9% (n = 144/203) had stage IV disease; 20.7% (n = 42/203) had stage III disease.
  • Three-year overall survival was 74% for stage I-II, 23% for stage III and 9% for stage IV disease.

Why it matters

The review consolidates the clinical and imaging pattern of a rare, aggressive renal cancer that often presents at an advanced stage. Recognition of its typical central or endophytic, hypo-enhancing and infiltrative appearance, alongside the marked stage-related survival differences, may help clinicians interpret findings and understand the seriousness of disease at presentation.

What to keep in mind

The review is based on published cases, which may not represent all patients with RMC; the abstract does not report a comparative assessment of study quality.

Source

Published in Int Urol Nephrol. This summary was written by xxcode from the publication's abstract and metadata. It is not peer reviewed and is not a substitute for the original article. For clinical decisions, review the original publication.

ShareTelegramLinkedIn

AI-generated summaries may contain errors or omissions. Verify clinically important information with the original publication.

More in Oncology (Medical)

Want this personalized?

Stop searching the literature. Choose what you follow and xxcode will build your personalized medical digest.

  • Your specialties
  • Your filters and thresholds
  • Clinical Research + Case Reports, tuned separately
  • Automatic weekly delivery
  • Audio and text

Prefer listening? Personalized audio digests are available with Pro.

Stay updated for free

Get the 3 most interesting publications in one specialty each week.

Weekly email. Unsubscribe anytime.