CT findings and clinical characteristics in distinguishing renal urothelial carcinoma mimicking renal cell carcinoma from clear cell renal cell carcinoma

Table 2 ROC curves of the clinical-CT characteristics for diagnosis RUC or ccRCC

Variable	AUC	p	95%CI	Sensitivity%	Specificity%
Infiltrative growth pattern	0.830	< 0.001	0.780–0.880	71.86	92.86
Heterogeneous enhancement	0.771	< 0.001	0.696–0.846	86.34	67.86
Preserving reniform contour	0.758	< 0.001	0.682–0.834	85.52	66.07
Hydronephrosis	0.733	< 0.001	0.653–0.814	87.70	58.93
Pseudo-capsule	0.724	< 0.001	0.665–0.783	51.91	92.86
Location	0.720	< 0.001	0.641–0.780	83.33	60.71
Hematuria	0.706	< 0.001	0.634–0.778	79.51	51.79
Flank pain	0.637	0.001	0.560–0.714	59.56	67.86
PerinephricStranding	0.635	0.001	0.555–0.716	69.95	57.14
History of kidney stones	0.627	0.002	0.539–0.714	93.17	32.14
Lymphatic metastasis	0.627	0.002	0.539–0.715	95.08	30.36
Tumor shape	0.626	0.002	0.553–0.699	44.81	80.36
Renal calculus	0.616	0.005	0.529–0.703	90.98	32.14
Renal vein invasion	0.587	0.036	0.501–0.673	88.80	28.57
Distant metastasis	0.558	0.162	0.473–0.643	90.16	21.43
Model-1	0.947	< 0.001	0.914–0.980	89.07	89.29
Model-2	0.960	< 0.001	0.935–0.985	92.08	89.29

CI, confidence interval; CP, corticomedullary phase; ccRCC, clear cell renal cell carcinoma; RUC, renal urothelial carcinoma
Model-1 = 1/[1 + e ^{– (2.765 Heterogeneous enhancement − 2.504 Bean shape − 0.004 Cyst−solid appearance − 2.423 Hydronephrosis – 1.589 Preserving reniform contour + 0.451)}]. Model-2 = 1 / [1 + e ^{– (3.094 Heterogeneous enhancement − 2.460 Bean shape − 0.029 Cyst−solid appearance − 2.528 Hydronephrosis – 1.229 Preserving reniform contour − 2.241 Gross hematuria – 1.375 Microscopic hematuria + 1.220)}

ISSN: 1471-2490