Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 347

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Chromophobe cell renal carcinoma and its variants—a report on 32 cases

Thoenes, W., Störkel, ST., Rumpelt, H.‐J., Moll, R., Baum, H. P., Werner, S.·1988·The Journal of Pathology

Abstract

This paper reports on 32 chromophobe cell renal carcinomas observed in 697 renal cell cancers (RCC) of adults (peak in the sixth decade of life). The chromophobe cell‐type differs from other types of RCC macroscopically, the cut‐surface being predominantly of grey‐beige colour. Histologically, there are two variants: one is the typical (light) variant ( n =22) and the other is eosinophilic ( n =10). Both variants have in common (a) reaction of the cytoplasm with Hale's acid iron colloid; (b) electron microscopic detection of cytoplasmic microvesicles (150–300 nm), frequently with ‘inner vesicles’, and (c) low glycogen content in comparison with the clear cell carcinoma. Immunocytochemical investigations on the intermediate filaments show a positive reaction for cytokeratins No. 18 (uniformly) and Nos. 7 and 19 (to varying extents) for both variants, whereas vimentin was not found in any of these carcinomas, in contrast to the clear‐cell type. The cytomorphological grading revealed predominantly G II tumours. A lymph node metastasis was found in one patient. On the basis of the mortality curves determined, the prognosis for patients with chromophobe cell carcinomas is more favourable than that of the clear‐cell type. In terms of differential diagnosis, on the one hand, the typical (light) variant of the chromophobe cell RCC must be delimited from the clear‐cell RCC, and on the other hand, the eosinophilic variant must be distinguished from the chromophilic or ‘granular’ RCC. Microscopic, histological, histochemical, electron microscopic, and intermediate filament analysis results document that the chromophobe cell type of RCC is a distinct entity. The implications for the nomenclature of RCC, especially with regard to the ‘granular’ type, are discussed.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/path.1711550402

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 8 references

Cited by

See all 347

Metadata

Authors
Thoenes, W., Störkel, S., Rumpelt, H. ‐., Moll, R., Baum, H. P., & Werner, S.
Venue
The Journal of Pathology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1988-08
Volume
155
Issue
4
Pages
277-287
ISSN
  • 0022-3417 (ISSN-L)
  • 1096-9896
OpenAlex
W2086578727
Cited by
347
References
8
FWCI
2.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Chromophobe cell renal carcinoma and its variants—a report on 32 cases. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/path.1711550402
The paper
Thoenes, W., Störkel, S., Rumpelt, H. ‐., Moll, R., Baum, H. P., & Werner, S. (1988). Chromophobe cell renal carcinoma and its variants—a report on 32 cases. The Journal of Pathology. https://doi.org/10.1002/path.1711550402

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.