
==== Front
Turk J Med Sci
Turk J Med Sci
Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences
1300-0144
1303-6165
Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK)

10.55730/1300-0144.5850
tjmed-54-04-784
Research Article
Effect of sex-specific abdominal fat tissue composition on WHO/ISUP nuclear grade of clear cell renal cell carcinoma
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6765-6552
BULUT Eser 1*
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5322-2972
KÜPELİ Ali 1
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7637-133X
RAMAZANOĞLU Mehmet Akif 2
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6272-6929
AYDIN Hasan Rıza 2
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6033-7500
SİBAL İbrahim 2
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7175-713X
BIÇAKLIOĞLU Fatih 2
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7544-9430
YILDIRIM Fatih 2
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0859-1741
ADANUR Şenol 3
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6999-5745
AL Salih 3
1 Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Trabzon Kanuni Training and Research Hospital, Trabzon, Turkiye
2 Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Trabzon Kanuni Training and Research Hospital, Trabzon, Turkiye
3 Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Atatürk University, Erzurum, Turkiye
* Correspondence: eserbulutmd@gmail.com
2024
04 3 2024
54 4 784791
05 8 2023
23 8 2024
04 3 2024
© TÜBİTAK
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Background/aim

To investigate the relationship between sex-related visceral obesity and WHO/ISUP nuclear grade in clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC).

Materials and methods

Between January 2018 and June 2022, 95 patients (56 men and 39 women) with pathologically proven ccRCC who underwent abdominal computed tomography examination were retrospectively examined. The patients were classified into two groups: low- and high-WHO/ISUP nuclear grade ccRCC (n = 58 and n = 37), respectively. Patient height, weight, body mass index (BMI), sex, age, subcutaneous fat area (SFA), visceral fat area (VFA), total fat area (TFA), and percentage of visceral fat (VF%) were recorded for the two groups.

Results

No significant differences were found in age, BMI, SFA, or TFA, but VFA and VF% were significantly higher in the high-grade patient group. In males, maximal tumor diameter (MTD) (67.8% sensitivity and 76.9% specificity) had the highest area under the curve (AUC), while in females, VF% (70.0% sensitivity and 73.7% specificity) had the highest AUC. VF% revealed an odds ratio (OR) of 1.09 in females with high-grade ccRCC, and in males, MTD was an independent predictor of ccRCC with an OR of 1.03.

Conclusions

Sex-related body fat tissue, including VFA and VF%, could be used for estimating WHO/ISUP nuclear grade in patients with ccRCC, especially in females.

Clear cell carcinoma
renal cell carcinoma
obesity
computed tomography
neoplasm grading
==== Body
pmc1. Introduction

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the most common primary malignant tumor of the kidney in adults and accounts for approximately 90%–95% of renal tumors [1]. Among the subtypes of RCC, clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is the predominant subtype, and the biological aggressiveness of ccRCC significantly changes the prognosis [2]. Numerous histopathological features, such as TNM stage, tumor size, tumor grade, coagulative necrosis, and microvascular invasion, have been determined to affect the postoperative prognosis of patients with ccRCC [3]. Among these prognostic determinants, nuclear grading of carcinoma is widely known as an important independent factor for cancer-specific survival in ccRCC patients [4].

The World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology (WHO/ISUP) grading system for ccRCC has increased the interobserver reproducibility. Additionally, it is more clinically relevant and easier to apply than the former Fuhrman grading system [5]. In the WHO/ISUP grading system, grades 1–3 are defined based on nucleolar prominence, and grade 4 is determined by the presence of highly atypical nuclear pleomorphism, sarcomatoid, or rhabdoid morphology differentiation [6]. While grades 1–2 are described as low grades, grades 3–4 are defined as high grades.

Obesity is described as an excess of body fat. Clinically, it is usually evaluated with an increase in body weight and body mass index (BMI), but obesity is quite a heterogeneous condition [7]. Visceral obesity has been shown to be strongly related to different malignant tumors, such as esophageal cancer, breast cancer, pancreatic cancer, lymph node metastases, and RCC [8–11]. It has been shown that visceral obesity is closely connected with ccRCC [12]. Since the distribution of body fat is different by sex, men are prone to have more visceral fat tissue, and women are prone to have more subcutaneous fat tissue [13]. Nguyen et al. reported that sex differences in visceral fat tissue can affect the overall survival in patients with RCC, and Hu et al. showed that females can have a higher nuclear grade related to increased visceral fat tissue than males [14,15].

The visceral fat tissue can be exactly evaluated and measured with presurgical computed tomography (CT) scans to determine visceral obesity [16]. However, there are only a few studies on the relationship between sex-specific visceral fat tissue and WHO/ISUP nuclear grade of ccRCC. In this study, we aimed to investigate the association between sex-specific abdominal fat tissue composition according to CT and the WHO/ISUP nuclear grade of ccRCC.

2. Materials and methods

2.1. Study population

This retrospective study was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee and complied with the Declaration of Helsinki. Data from January 2018 to June 2022 were obtained through an electronic search of the Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS). The inclusion criteria were as follows: available presurgical CT scans, pathologically proven ccRCC, and WHO/ISUP nuclear grades. The exclusion criteria were prominent artifacts on CT images due to motion or metal, ccRCC without WHO/ISUP nuclear grades, lack of fit on axial abdominal CT images, and recent significant weight changes. Finally, based on the histopathologic analyses, 95 patients with ccRCC were included in the study. Demographic data, including the patient’s age, sex, height (m), and body weight (kg), were noted for the patient from the medical files. Additionally, BMI (kg/m2) was calculated as the ratio of total body weight to height squared for patients in both groups.

2.2. CT protocol

Abdominal CT examinations were performed with the participants in the supine position, and the patients were scanned from the diaphragm to the pubic symphysis using a 128-slice CT scanner (GE Optima CT660, GE Healthcare, Milwaukee, WI, USA). All patients were injected with a total of 100–120 mL of nonionic contrast agent and 30 mL of saline at a flow rate of 4 mL/s via the antecubital vein with mechanical power injectors according to the portal venous phase with a start delay of 70 s. The CT protocol was as follows: 120 kVp, tube current of 150–165 mAs, maximum collimation of 2.5 mm, slice thickness of 1.5 mm and rotation time of 0.5 s. The images were then reconstructed into multiplanar reformations.

2.3. Image analysis

All CT examinations were reevaluated by two radiologists (E.B. and A.K., with 8 and 10 years of abdominal radiology experience, respectively) to reach a consensus without knowing the WHO/ISUP nuclear grades of the lesions and demographic data. The CT images were transferred to a workstation for evaluation. The maximum tumor diameters (MTD) were measured at the axial slice. Next, the cross-sectional abdominal visceral (VFA) and subcutaneous fat areas (SFA) were measured from CT images at the umbilical level. The VFA, TFA, and SFA values were obtained by setting the attenuation values for a region of interest between −150 and −30 HU according to a previous study (Figure 1) [16]. While the VFA was determined as fat tissue between the transversus abdominis fascia and organ surfaces, the SFA was determined in the area between the abdominal fascia and the dermis. Moreover, the percentage of visceral fat (VF%) was calculated using the following formula: VF% = VFA/TFA × 100.

2.4. Histopathological assessment of nuclear grade

The histopathology reports were used to evaluate the WHO/ISUP nuclear grades. A total of 22 patients underwent partial nephrectomy, 14 patients underwent total nephrectomy, and 59 patients underwent radical nephrectomy. All tumors were separated into two groups: low-grade ccRCC (WHO/ISUP grades 1, 2) and high-grade ccRCC (WHO/ISUP grades 3, 4).

2.5. Statistical analysis

All the data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS 13.0 Statistical Software, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) and the MedCalc Statistical Software package version 16.8 (MedCalc Software Bvba, Ostend, Belgium). Descriptive statistics, including the means and ranges, were calculated for age, height, BMI, MTD, SFA, VFA, TFA, and VF%. The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test was used to identify deviations from a normal distribution, and appropriate tests were selected accordingly. Student’s t-test was used to compare continuous variables. Moreover, the diagnostic performance indexes, including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV), were calculated for these parameters regarding differentiation of low-grade and high-grade ccRCC. Multivariate regression analysis was conducted to elucidate the independent influencing factors affecting the accuracy of nuclear grading. A p-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant for all analyses.

3. Results

In this study, we analyzed the data of 95 patients (56 male, 39 female) with ccRCC. The characteristics of the patients and their results are presented in Table 1. Tumors were observed in the right kidney in 46 patients and in the left kidney in 49 patients. Fifty-eight of 95 ccRCCs were low-grade, and 37 were high-grade. The mean age, height (m), and weight (kg) of the patients with low- and high-grade ccRCC were 59.1 ± 11 y, 1.59 ± 0.1 m, and 76.3 ± 13.4 kg and 60.3 ± 12 y, 1.60 ± 0.1 m, and 76.0 ± 8.8 kg, respectively. Additionally, the mean BMI (kg/m2) values of the patients with low- and high-grade ccRCC were 29.9 ± 6.5 and 28.2 ± 5.3, respectively. No statistically significant differences were found in mean height, body weight, or BMI between the two groups (p > 0.186).

The mean SFA, VFA, TFA, and VF% values in the patients with low- and high-grade ccRCC were as follows: SFA, 216.0 cm2 and 236.1 cm2; VFA, 139.5 cm2 and 171.6 cm2; TFA, 359.3 cm2 and 407.8 cm2; and VF%, 38.8 and 43.9, respectively. No significant differences were detected in the SFA and TFA values (p > 0.087). While patients with high-grade ccRCC had higher VF% and VFA (Figures 2a–2c), patients with low-grade ccRCC had lower VF% and VFA (Figures 3a–3c). Significant differences were observed in VFA and VF% between the two groups (p < 0.037).

The characteristics of the low-grade and high-grade groups based on sex are shown in Table 2. In males, there was a significant difference in only maximal tumor diameter (MTD) between the low-grade and high-grade groups. In females, the VFA, VF%, and MTD were significantly higher in the high-grade group than in the low-grade ccRCC group.

The ROC curves for VFA, VF%, and MTD are presented in Figure 4. The AUCs were 0.643, 0.627, and 0.735 for VFA, VF%, and MTD, respectively. From the ROC analysis, the optimal cutoff values that provided the highest sensitivity and specificity for VFA, VF%, and MTD were 154.8 cm2, 40.7 cm2, and 54.0 mm, respectively. The highest diagnostic values acquired for the MTD were 69.4% sensitivity and 65.5% specificity. Using these cutoff values, the diagnostic performance indexes based on sex are shown in Table 3. No significant difference was observed between the AUCs of VFA, VF%, and MTD (p>0.186). In males, MTD (67.8% sensitivity and 76.9% specificity) had the highest AUC, while in females, VF% (70.0% sensitivity and 73.7% specificity) had the highest AUC.

The logistic regression results in the univariate model for determining the associations between variables and WHO/ISUP nuclear grades of ccRCC are shown in Table 4. In the univariate model, VFA (OR, 1.00; 95% CI, 1.00–1.01: p = 0.026), MTD (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01–1.04: p < 0.001), and VF% (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.00–1.07; p = 0.039) were associated with high-grade ccRCC. Additionally, the logistic regression results of the multivariate model are shown in Table 5. In the multivariate model, VFA (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97–0.99; p = 0.004) and MTD (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.94–0.97; p < 0.001) were significant predictors of high-grade ccRCC.

4. Discussion

Obesity is defined as abnormal or excessive fat accumulation on the body, and BMI is a preferred tool to determine the prevalence of obesity in the population, but obesity is quite a heterogeneous condition [7]. Furthermore, waist circumference measurement is superior to BMI in determining visceral obesity [17]. Abdominal fat distribution, including VFA and SFA, can be precisely measured using MRI or CT to determine abdominal obesity. As an active hormonal tissue, visceral fat tissue releases inflammatory cytokines, insulin, and insulin-like growth factor. These agents can drive the proliferation of cancer cells [18]. It has been reported that visceral obesity carries a risk of malignant tumor development, including tumors such as esophageal cancer, breast cancer, pancreatic cancer, lymph node metastases, and RCC [8–11].

It has been shown that visceral obesity is a significant predictor of survival in metastatic RCC and has a high impact on survival, prognosis, subtype, and grade of RCC [18–20]. Additionally, it has been reported that VFA is an independent prognostic factor for ccRCC, high-grade RCC, and recurrence-free survival in ccRCC [11,12,20]. In contrast, Martini et al. showed that higher total fat was related to survival in metastatic RCC, and Maurits et al. reported that worse overall survival was detected in stage IV RCC patients with lower amounts of visceral adipose tissue [21,22]. Clear cell renal cell carcinoma is the most common and most lethal RCC variant [2]. BMI seems to be an independent predictor of clear-cell histology in RCC. Additionally, the odds of having ccRCC can increase with increased BMI [12].

Although there are several pathological prognostic factors, including nuclear grade, tumor staging, lymphovascular invasion and necrosis, one of the most common prognostic parameters arises from the nuclear grading system for detecting the aggressiveness of ccRCC [3–4]. WHO/ISUP nuclear grading focuses on nucleolar prominence, which is a component of the Fuhrman grading. More objective and simple criteria are used in WHO/ISUP grades 1–3 than in the Fuhrman grading system, which assigns the same importance to nucleolar prominence, nuclear size, and nuclear shape [23]. Needle biopsies are commonly used to diagnose ccRCC; however, they have some limitations in determining nuclear grading, especially in low-grade cases and large heterogeneous tumors [24]. Therefore, there is a need for the accurate prediction of nuclear grade without radical procedures. In this study, we investigated the effect of visceral obesity on predicting WHO/ISUP nuclear grade.

We found that there were no statistically significant differences in terms of height, body weight, BMI, TFA or SFA between the low- and high-grade groups, whereas VFA and VFA% were significantly higher in patients with high-grade ccRCC. Additionally, the MTD was significantly greater in high-grade ccRCC patients than in low-grade patients. In males, the MTD was the only parameter that was significantly higher in the high-grade group than in the low-grade group. In females, the MTD, VFA, and VF% were significantly higher in the high-grade group than in the low-grade group. Hu et al. reported that any of the variables showed a significant difference between the low-grade and high-grade groups in males, and the VFA and VF% revealed significantly greater degrees of elevation in the high-grade group than in the low-grade group in females [15]. While Hu et al. used the Fuhrman nuclear grading system in the pathological grading of ccRCC in their multicenter study, we used the WHO/ISUP nuclear grading system which is a new classification system in our single center study [15].

In our study, the highest diagnostic values provided by MTD showed 69.4% sensitivity and 65.5% specificity. Although the MTD exhibited the highest AUC among the examined variables across both groups, no significant difference was observed between the AUCs. Additionally, no significant difference was found between the AUCs of MTD, VFA, and VF% in the male and female groups. In males, the highest diagnostic values provided by MTD showed 68.7% sensitivity and 76.9% specificity. In females, the highest diagnostic values provided by VF% showed 70.0% sensitivity and 79.7% specificity.

In this study, we separated the patients according to their sex and then classified the lesions into subgroups by nuclear grade to prevent the effect of sex when considering the true effect of visceral fat tissue in predicting prognosis in ccRCC. Although there was no significant difference among VFA and VF% in males, the VFA and VF% were significantly higher in females between low and high nuclear grades of ccRCC. There are differences in the distribution of body fat by sex, such that men are prone to have more visceral fat tissue, while women are prone to have more fat in the subcutaneous tissue [13]. Additionally, fat tissue secretes inflammatory cytokines that alter metabolic demands and increase the risk of cancer development [25]. Since women have a low tolerance for visceral fat storage, this may cause an increased risk of cancer in women. In this study, we found that VF% had the highest OR in the univariate and multivariate analyses.

Differences in the level of the sex hormone estrogen may provide an explanation for the association of VF% with increased risk of ccRCC. Estrogen can ease fat tissue deposition and is more abundant in women. It has alpha and beta receptors. It has been reported that the beta receptor reduces cell growth, migration, and invasion ability and increases apoptosis in RCC [13]. Additionally, an increased alpha to beta receptor ratio restricts visceral fat tissue deposition in premenopausal women [26]. In this study, we could not investigate the blood estrogen level.

This study had a number of limitations. First, the use of retrospective analysis could lead to selection bias. Second, the number of patients was also relatively small. Third, the CT images were evaluated based on a consensus, and we did not evaluate the inter- or intraobserver variability in this study. Fourth, there were no laboratory parameters, such as blood estrogen data and lipid panels. Finally, the adipose tissue area was evaluated from a single CT section instead of via a volume calculation.

In conclusion, significant differences were found in VFA and VF% in high-grade ccRCC in female patients unlike in male patients in this study. The sex-specific visceral fat composition represented by VFA and VF% could be used for estimating WHO/ISUP nuclear grade in patients with ccRCC. However, extensive studies with larger populations are needed to clearly confirm the relationships between sex-specific differences in visceral obesity and ccRCC.

Figure 1 Automatic calculation of visceral and subcutaneous fatty tissue in the range of −150 and −30 HU on the CT image in the axial plane at the level of the umbilicus.

Figure 2 44-year-old man with right-sided clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Contrast enhanced CT (a) shows a tumor (arrow) in the right kidney with a VF% of 57.2% (b). Histologic photomicrograph confirms WHO/ISUP nuclear grade IV ccRCC on high-power (400×; hematoxylin-eosin stain) magnification (c).

Figure 3 49-year-old man with right-sided clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Contrast enhanced CT (a) shows a tumor (arrow) in the right kidney with a VF% of 39.2% (b). Histologic photomicrograph confirms WHO/ISUP nuclear grade I ccRCC on high-power (400×; hematoxylin-eosin stain) magnification (c).

Table 1 The baseline characteristics and visceral fat measurements of patients.

	Total	Low-grade (n = 58)	High grade (n = 37)	p-value	
Age (years)	59.6 ± 11.7 (34–86)	59.1 ± 11.4 (35–86)	60.3 ± 12.2 (34–86)	0.606	
Sex (M/F)	56/39	39/19	17/20	0.040	
Height (cm)	159.8 ± 7.7 (143–180)	159.4 ± 8.5 (143–180)	160.4 ± 6.2 (143–170)	0.534	
Weight (kg)	76.2 ± 11.8 (52–114)	76.3 ± 13.4 (52–114)	76.0 ± 8.8 (60–93)	0.902	
BMI (kg/m2)	29.3 ± 6.1 (18.9–46.6)	29.9 ± 6.5 (18.9–46.4)	28.2 ± 5.3 (19.7–46.6)	0.186	
MTD (mm)	61.8 ± 36.8 (16–194)	49.1 ± 34.2 (16–112)	82.4 ± 44.0 (22–194)	<0.001	
VFA (cm2)	152.0 ± 69.8 (12.8–296.7)	139.5 ± 71.6 (12.8–296.7)	171.6 ± 62.9 (15.0–272.8)	0.002	
SFA (cm2)	223.8 ± 112.7 (18.4–606.1)	216.0 ± 112.6 (29.8–606.1)	236.1± 113.1 (18.4–552.5)	0.321	
TFA (cm2)	378.2 ± 154.1 (33.4–863.4)	359.3± 154.1 (54.9–863.4)	407.8 ± 151.5 (33.4–739.2)	0.087	
VF%	40.8 ± 12.0 (15.8–76.3)	38.8 ± 12.1 (15.8–76.3)	43.9 ± 11.2 (25.2–71.2)	0.037	
BMI: body mass index; MTD: maximal tumor diameter; VFA: visceral fat area; SFA: subcutaneous fat area; TFA: total fat area; VF%: percentage of visceral fat.

Table 2 The characteristics of the low-grade and high-grade groups based on sex.

	Male (n = 56)	Female (n = 39)	p-value	Male	Female	
Low-grade (n = 39)	High-grade (n = 17)	p-value	Low-grade (n = 19)	High-grade (n = 20)	p value	
Age (years)	59.5 ± 11.1	59.7 ± 12.6	0.925	58.7 ± 11.0	61.3 ± 11.4	0.441	60.0 ± 12.4	59.5 ± 13.1	0.894	
Height (cm)	160.7 ± 6.8	158.5 ± 8.7	0.174	159.5 ± 6.2	163.3 ± 7.6	0.056	159.1 ± 12.1	157.9 ± 5.8	0.687	
Weight (kg)	76.0 ± 11.6	76.5 ± 12.2	0.840	75.0 ± 12.8	78.2 ± 8.0	0.354	79.0 ± 14.3	74.2 ± 12.6	0.227	
BMI (kg/m2)	27.9 ± 5.6	31.2 ± 6.2	0.010	28.7 ± 6.1	26.2 ± 4.6	0.141	32.5 ± 6.5	29.9 ± 5.8	0.199	
MTD (mm)	64.3 ± 38.0	58.4 ± 35.2	0.450	52.1 ± 26.2	93.9 ± 46.2	<0.001	42.8 ± 18.4	73.9 ± 41.1	0.006	
VFA (cm2)	148.5 ± 74.4	157.1 ± 63.3	0.558	144.8 ± 73.6	156.9 ± 77.7	0.582	128.5 ± 68.0	184.2 ± 45.2	0.005	
SFA (cm2)	187.0 ± 85.8	276.7 ± 126.0	<0.001	180.7 ± 75.2	201.4 ± 107.3	0.412	288.3± 141.6	265.6 ± 111.7	0.581	
TFA (cm2)	339.5± 137.8	433.8± 161.1	0.003	331.4± 124.9	358.3± 166.3	0.505	416.8 ± 191.4	349.9± 127.1	0.529	
VF%	43.3 ± 11.0	37.2 ± 12.6	0.014	42.3 ± 10.9	45.4 ± 12.3	0.338	31.4 ± 11.5	42.6 ± 11.3	0.004	
BMI: body mass index; MTD: maximal tumor diameter; VFA: visceral fat area; SFA: subcutaneous fat area; TFA: total fat area; VF%: percentage of visceral fat.

Table 3 Results of receiver operating characteristic analysis.

	Total	Sex	
Male (n = 56)	Female (n = 39)	
	VFA	VF%	MTD	VFA	VF%	MTD	VFA	VF%	MTD	
AUC	0.643	0.627	0.735	0.552	0.588	0.780	0.753	0.787	0.733	
Cutoff level	154.8	40.7	54.0	157.7	42.7	63.0	164.7	36.2	51.0	
Sensitivity (%)	67.5	67.5	69.4	58.8	64.7	68.7	70.0	70.0	65.0	
Specificity (%)	55.1	58.6	65.5	61.4	53.8	76.9	73.6	73.7	78.9	
PPV(%)	49.0	51.0	55.6	40.0	37.9	55.0	73.7	73.7	76.5	
NPV(%)	72.7	73.9	77.6	77.4	77.8	85.7	70.0	70.0	68.2	
AUC: area under the curve; MTD: maximal tumor diameter; VFA: visceral fat area; VF%: percentage of visceral fat; PPV: positive predictive value; NPV: negative predictive value.

Table 4 Univariate analysis for predicting high-grade ccRCC.

	Total (n = 95)	Male (n = 56)	Female (n = 39)	
	OR	%95 CI	p-value	OR	%95 CI	p-value	OR	%95 CI	p-value	
Age (years)	1.00	0.97–1.04	0.643	1.02	0.96–1.07	0.429	0.99	0.95–1.05	0.890	
MTD (mm)	1.03	1.01–1.04	<0.001	1.03	1.01–1.06	<0.001	1.03	1.00–1.07	0.002	
VFA, cm2	1.00	1.00–1.01	0.026	1.00	0.99–1.01	0.574	1.01	1.00–1.04	0.003	
SFA, cm2	1.00	0.99–1.00	0.393	1.00	0.99–1.01	0.402	0.99	0.98–1.00	0.568	
TFA, cm2	1.00	0.99–1.00	0.131	1.00	0.99–1.01	0.494	1.00	0.99–1.00	0.514	
VF%	1.03	1.00–1.07	0.039	1.02	0.97–10.7	0.332	1.09	1.02–1.17	0.002	
MTD: maximal tumor diameter; VFA: visceral fat area; SFA: subcutaneous fat area; TFA: total fat area; VF%: percentage of visceral fat.

Table 5 Multivariate analysis for predicting high-grade ccRCC.

	Total (n = 95)	Male (n = 56)	Female (n = 39)	
	OR	%95 CI	p-value	OR	%95 CI	p-value	OR	%95 CI	p-value	
MTD (mm)	0.95	0.94–0.97	<0.001	0.95	0.93–0.98	0.001	0.93	0.88–0.98	0.011	
VFA, cm2	0.98	0.97–0.99	0.004	0.99	0.97–1.00	0.142	0.97	0.95–0.99	0.022	
VF%	1.00	0.95–1.06	0.765	1.00	0.92–1.08	0.970	0.95	0.87–1.04	0.353	
MTD: maximal tumor diameter; VFA: visceral fat area; VF%: percentage of visceral f

Conflict of interest: The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval: The study was approved by the ethics review board from Trabzon Kanuni Training and Research Hospital (2022/52).

Funding: No funding is provided for this study.
==== Refs
References

1 Medina-Rico M López-Ramos H Lobo M Romo J Prada JG Epidemiology of renal cancer in developing countries: Review of the literature Canadian Urological Association Journal 2018 12 3 E154 E162 10.5489/cuaj.4464 29283089
2 Muglia VF Prando A Renal cell carcinoma: Histological classification and correlation with imaging findings Radiologia Brasileira 2015 48 3 166 74 10.1590/0100-3984.2013.1927 26185343
3 Mattila KE Vainio P Jaakkola PM Prognostic factors for localized clear cell renal cell carcinoma and their application in adjuvant therapy Cancers 2022 14 1 239 10.3390/cancers14010239 35008402
4 Mancini V Battaglia M Ditonno P Palazzo S Lastilla G Current insights in renal cell cancer pathology Journal of Urologic Oncology 2008 26 3 225 238 10.1016/j.urolonc.2007.05.017 18452811
5 Browning L Colling R Verrill C WHO/ISUP grading of clear cell renal cell carcinoma and papillary renal cell carcinoma; validation of grading on the digital pathology platform and perspectives on reproducibility of grade Diagnostic Pathology 2021 16 1 75 10.1186/s13000-021-01130-2 34419085
6 Moch H Cubilla AL Humphrey PA Reuter VE Ulbright TM The 2016 WHO Classification of tumours of the urinary system and male genital organs-part a: renal, penile, and testicular tumours European Urology 2016 70 1 93 105 10.1016/j.eururo.2016.02.029 26935559
7 Keys A Fidanza F Karvonen MJ Kimura N Taylor HL Indices of relative weight and obesity Journal of Chronic Diseases 1972 25 6 329 343 10.1016/0021-9681(72)90027-6 4650929
8 Okumura S Kaido T Hamaguchi Y Kobayashi A Shirai H Visceral adiposity and sarcopenic visceral obesity are associated with poor prognosis after resection of pancreatic cancer Annals of Surgical Oncology 2017 24 12 3732 3740 10.1245/s10434-017-6077-y 28871520
9 Yip C Goh V Davies A Gossage J Mitchell-Hay R Assessment of sarcopenia and changes in body composition after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and associations with clinical outcomes in oesophageal cancer European Radiology 2014 24 5 998 1005 10.1007/s00330-014-3110-4 24535076
10 Zhu Y Wang HK Zhang HL Yao XD Zhang SL Visceral obesity and risk of high grade disease in clinical t1a renal cell carcinoma Journal of Urological Surgery 2013 189 2 447 453 10.1016/j.juro.2012.09.030
11 Keehn A Srivastava A Maiman R Taylor J DiVito J The relationship between visceral obesity and the clinicopathologic features of patients with small renal masses Journal of Endourology 2015 29 3 372 376 10.1089/end.2014.0512 25203393
12 Kaneko G Miyajima A Yuge K Yazawa S Mizuno R Visceral obesity is associated with better recurrence-free survival after curative surgery for Japanese patients with localized clear cell renal cell carcinoma Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology 2015 45 2 210 216 10.1093/jjco/hyu193 25420691
13 Palmer BF Clegg DJ The sexual dimorphism of obesity Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology 2015 402 113 119 10.1016/j.mce.2014.11.029 25578600
14 Nguyen GK Mellnick VM Yim AK Salter A Ippolito JE Synergy of sex differences in visceral fat measured with CT and tumor metabolism helps predict overall survival in patients with renal cell carcinoma Radiology 2018 287 3 884 892 10.1148/radiol.2018171504 29558292
15 Hu Z Wu J Lai S Xu Y Zhan J Clear cell renal cell carcinoma: the value of sex-specific abdominal visceral fat measured on CT for prediction of Fuhrman nuclear grade European Radiology 2020 30 7 3977 3986 10.1007/s00330-020-06747-3 32144457
16 Kupeli A Danisan G Kocak M Taskent I Balcı IG Gastric wall fat halo sign in patients without intestinal disease Clinical Imaging 2019 54 31 36 10.1016/j.clinimag.2018.11.013 30521990
17 Wei J Liu X Xue H Wang Y Shi Z Comparisons of visceral adiposity index, body shape index, body mass index and waist circumference and their associations with diabetes mellitus in adults Nutrients 2019 11 7 1580 10.3390/nu11071580 31336951
18 Ladoire S Bonnetain F Gauthier M Zanetta S Petit JM Visceral fat area as a new independent predictive factor of survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with antiangiogenic agents Oncologist 2011 16 1 71 81 10.1634/theoncologist.2010-0227
19 Kaneko G Miyajima A Yuge K Yazawa S Mizuno R Visceral obesity is associated with better recurrence-free survival after curative surgery for Japanese patients with localized clear cell renal cell carcinoma Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology 2015 45 2 210 216 10.1093/jjco/hyu193 25420691
20 Wang HK Song XS Cheng Y Qu YY Zhang SL Visceral fat accumulation is associated with different pathological subtypes of renal cell carcinoma (RCC): a multicentre study in China BJU International 2014 114 4 496 502 10.1111/bju.12592 25383400
21 Martini DJ Olsen TA Goyal S Liu Y Evans ST Body composition variables as radiographic biomarkers of clinical outcomes in metastatic renal cell carcinoma patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors Frontiers in Oncology 2021 11 707050 10.3389/fonc.2021.707050 34307176
22 Maurits JSF Sedelaar JPM Mulders PFA Aben KKH Kiemeney LALM Skeletal muscle radiodensity and visceral adipose tissue index are associated with survival in renal cell cancer - a multicenter population-based cohort study Clinical Nutrition 2022 41 1 131 143 10.1016/j.clnu.2021.11.012 34872047
23 Sika-Paotonu D Bethwaite PB McCredie MR William Jordan T Delahunt B Nucleolar grade but not Fuhrman grade is applicable to papillary renal cell carcinoma The American Journal of Surgical Pathology 2006 30 9 1091 1096 10.1097/01.pas.0000209833.69972.2b 16931953
24 Murase Y Iwata H Takahara T Tsuzuki T The highest Fuhrman and WHO/ISUP grade influences the Ki-67 labeling index of those of grades 1 and 2 in clear cell renal cell carcinoma Pathology International 2020 70 12 984 991 10.1111/pin.13025 32997867
25 Khandekar MJ Cohen P Spiegelman BM Molecular mechanisms of cancer development in obesity Nature Reviews Cancer 2011 11 12 886 895 10.1038/nrc3174 22113164
26 Yu CP Ho JY Huang YT Cha TL Sun GH Estrogen inhibits renal cell carcinoma cell progression through estrogen receptor-β activation PLoS One 2013 8 2 e56667 10.1371/journal.pone.0056667 23460808
