| 1. |
- Thorgeirsson, Thorgeir E, et al.
(author)
-
A variant associated with nicotine dependence, lung cancer and peripheral arterial disease
- 2008
-
In: Nature. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0028-0836 .- 1476-4687. ; 452:7187, s. 9-638
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Smoking is a leading cause of preventable death, causing about 5 million premature deaths worldwide each year(1,2). Evidence for genetic influence on smoking behaviour and nicotine dependence (ND)(3-8) has prompted a search for susceptibility genes. Furthermore, assessing the impact of sequence variants on smoking-related diseases is important to public health(9,10). Smoking is the major risk factor for lung cancer (LC)(11-14) and is one of the main risk factors for peripheral arterial disease (PAD)(15-17). Here we identify a common variant in the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor gene cluster on chromosome 15q24 with an effect on smoking quantity, ND and the risk of two smoking- related diseases in populations of European descent. The variant has an effect on the number of cigarettes smoked per day in our sample of smokers. The same variant was associated with ND in a previous genomewide association study that used low- quantity smokers as controls(18,19), and with a similar approach we observe a highly significant association with ND. A comparison of cases of LC and PAD with population controls each showed that the variant confers risk of LC and PAD. The findings provide a case study of a gene - environment interaction(20), highlighting the role of nicotine addiction in the pathology of other serious diseases.
|
|
| 2. |
- Lardas, Michael, et al.
(author)
-
Systematic Review of Surgical Management of Nonmetastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma with Vena Caval Thrombus
- 2016
-
In: European Urology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0302-2838 .- 1873-7560. ; 70:2, s. 265-280
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- CONTEXT: Overall, 4-10% of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) present with venous tumour thrombus. It is uncertain which surgical technique is best for these patients. Appraisal of outcomes with differing techniques would guide practice.OBJECTIVE: To systematically review relevant literature comparing the outcomes of different surgical therapies and approaches in treating vena caval thrombus (VCT) from nonmetastatic RCC.EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Relevant databases (Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library) were searched to identify relevant comparative studies. Risk of bias and confounding assessments were performed. A narrative synthesis of the evidence was presented.EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The literature search identified 824 articles. Fourteen studies reporting on 2262 patients were included. No distinct surgical method was superior for the excision of VCT, although the method appeared to be dependent on tumour thrombus level. Minimal access techniques appeared to have better perioperative and recovery outcomes than traditional median sternotomy, but the impact on oncologic outcomes is unknown. Preoperative renal artery embolisation did not offer any oncologic benefits and instead resulted in significantly worse perioperative and recovery outcomes, including possibly higher perioperative mortality. The comparison of cardiopulmonary bypass versus no cardiopulmonary bypass showed no differences in oncologic outcomes. Overall, there were high risks of bias and confounding.CONCLUSIONS: The evidence base, although derived from retrospective case series and complemented by expert opinion, suggests that patients with nonmetastatic RCC and VCT and acceptable performance status should be considered for surgical intervention. Despite a robust review, the findings were associated with uncertainty due to the poor quality of primary studies available. The most efficacious surgical technique remains unclear.PATIENT SUMMARY: We examined the literature on the benefits of surgery to remove kidney cancers that have spread to neighbouring veins. The results suggest such surgery, although challenging and associated with high risk of complications, appears to be feasible and effective and should be contemplated for suitable patients if possible; however, many uncertainties remain due to the poor quality of the data.
|
|
| 3. |
- Ljungberg, Börje, et al.
(author)
-
EAU guidelines on renal cell carcinoma : the 2010 update
- 2010
-
In: European Urology. - : Elsevier. - 0302-2838 .- 1873-7560. ; 58:3, s. 398-406
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Context and objectives The European Association of Urology Guideline Group for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has prepared these guidelines to help clinicians assess the current evidence-based management of RCC and to incorporate the present recommendations into daily clinical practice. Evidence acquisition The recommendations provided in the current updated guidelines are based on a thorough review of available RCC guidelines and review articles combined with a systematic literature search using Medline and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Evidence synthesis A number of recent prospective randomised studies concerning RCC are now available with a high level of evidence, whereas earlier publications were based on retrospective analyses, including some larger multicentre validation studies, meta-analyses, and well-designed controlled studies. Conclusions These guidelines contain information for the treatment of an individual patient according to a current standardised general approach. Updated recommendations concerning diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up can improve the clinical handling of patients with RCC. Take Home Message This review of the 2010 European Association of Urology renal cell carcinoma guidelines is intended to help clinicians access knowledge of current evidence-based management according to a standardised general approach. Structured literature searches were carried out in different databases of systematic reviews and clinical trials. Grade of recommendation was assigned based on the underlying evidence.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Marconi, Lorenzo, et al.
(author)
-
Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy of Percutaneous Renal Tumour Biopsy
- 2016
-
In: European Urology. - : Elsevier. - 0302-2838 .- 1873-7560. ; 69:4, s. 660-673
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Context: The role of percutaneous renal tumour biopsy (RTB) remains controversial due to uncertainties regarding its diagnostic accuracy and safety.Objective: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the safety and accuracy of percutaneous RTB for the diagnosis of malignancy, histologic tumour subtype, and grade.Evidence acquisition: Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for studies providing data on diagnostic accuracy and complications of percutaneous core biopsy (CB) or fine-needle aspiration (FNA) of renal tumours. A meta-analysis was performed to obtain pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity for diagnosis of malignancy. The Cohen kappa coefficient (κ) was estimated for the analysis of histotype/grade concordance between diagnosis on RTB and surgical specimen. Risk of bias assessment was performed (QUADAS-2).Evidence synthesis: A total of 57 studies recruiting 5228 patients were included. The overall median diagnostic rate of RTB was 92%. The sensitivity and specificity of diagnostic CBs and FNAs were 99.1% and 99.7%, and 93.2% and 89.8%, respectively. A good (κ = 0.683) and a fair (κ = 0.34) agreement were observed between histologic subtype and Fuhrman grade on RTB and surgical specimen, respectively. A very low rate of Clavien ≥2 complications was reported. Study limitations included selection and differential-verification bias.Conclusions: RTB is safe and has a high diagnostic yield in experienced centres. Both CB and FNA have good accuracy for the diagnosis of malignancy and histologic subtype, with better performance for CB. The accuracy for Fuhrman grade is fair. Overall, the quality of the evidence was moderate. Prospective cohort studies recruiting consecutive patients and using homogeneous reference standards are required.Patient summary: We systematically reviewed the literature to assess the safety and diagnostic performance of renal tumour biopsy (RTB). The results suggest that RTB has good accuracy in diagnosing renal cancer and its subtypes, and it appears to be safe. However, the quality of evidence was moderate, and better quality studies are required to provide a more definitive answer.
|
|
| 6. |
- Ryan, Charles J, et al.
(author)
-
Abiraterone acetate plus prednisone versus placebo plus prednisone in chemotherapy-naive men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (COU-AA-302) : final overall survival analysis of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study
- 2015
-
In: The Lancet Oncology. - 1474-5488. ; 16:2, s. 60-152
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Abiraterone acetate plus prednisone significantly improved radiographic progression-free survival compared with placebo plus prednisone in men with chemotherapy-naive castration-resistant prostate cancer at the interim analyses of the COU-AA-302 trial. Here, we present the prespecified final analysis of the trial, assessing the effect of abiraterone acetate plus prednisone on overall survival, time to opiate use, and use of other subsequent therapies.METHODS: In this placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomised phase 3 study, 1088 asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic patients with chemotherapy-naive prostate cancer stratified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology performance status (0 vs 1) were randomly assigned with a permuted block allocation scheme via a web response system in a 1:1 ratio to receive either abiraterone acetate (1000 mg once daily) plus prednisone (5 mg twice daily; abiraterone acetate group) or placebo plus prednisone (placebo group). Coprimary endpoints were radiographic progression-free survival and overall survival analysed in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00887198.FINDINGS: At a median follow-up of 49.2 months (IQR 47.0-51.8), 741 (96%) of the prespecified 773 death events for the final analysis had been observed: 354 (65%) of 546 patients in the abiraterone acetate group and 387 (71%) of 542 in the placebo group. 238 (44%) patients initially receiving prednisone alone subsequently received abiraterone acetate plus prednisone as crossover per protocol (93 patients) or as subsequent therapy (145 patients). Overall, 365 (67%) patients in the abiraterone acetate group and 435 (80%) in the placebo group received subsequent treatment with one or more approved agents. Median overall survival was significantly longer in the abiraterone acetate group than in the placebo group (34.7 months [95% CI 32.7-36.8] vs 30.3 months [28.7-33.3]; hazard ratio 0.81 [95% CI 0.70-0.93]; p=0.0033). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events of special interest were cardiac disorders (41 [8%] of 542 patients in the abiraterone acetate group vs 20 [4%] of 540 patients in the placebo group), increased alanine aminotransferase (32 [6%] vs four [<1%]), and hypertension (25 [5%] vs 17 [3%]).INTERPRETATION: In this randomised phase 3 trial with a median follow-up of more than 4 years, treatment with abiraterone acetate prolonged overall survival compared with prednisone alone by a margin that was both clinically and statistically significant. These results further support the favourable safety profile of abiraterone acetate in patients with chemotherapy-naive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development.
|
|
