| 1. |
- Abu-Ghanem, Yasmin, et al.
(author)
-
Should patients with low-risk renal cell carcinoma be followed differently after nephron-sparing surgery vs radical nephrectomy?
- 2021
-
In: BJU International. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 1464-4096 .- 1464-410X. ; 128:3, s. 386-394
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objective: To investigate whether pT1 renal cell carcinoma (RCC) should be followed differently after partial (PN) or radical nephrectomy (RN) based on a retrospective analysis of a multicentre database (RECUR).Subjects: A retrospective study was conducted in 3380 patients treated for nonmetastatic RCC between January 2006 and December 2011 across 15 centres from 10 countries, as part of the RECUR database project. For patients with pT1 clear-cell RCC, patterns of recurrence were compared between RN and PN according to recurrence site. Univariate and multivariate models were used to evaluate the association between surgical approach and recurrence-free survival (RFS) and cancer-specific mortality (CSM).Results: From the database 1995 patients were identified as low-risk patients (pT1, pN0, pNx), of whom 1055 (52.9%) underwent PN. On multivariate analysis, features associated with worse RFS included tumour size (hazard ratio [HR] 1.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.14–1.39; P < 0.001), nuclear grade (HR 2.31, 95% CI 1.73–3.08; P < 0.001), tumour necrosis (HR 1.5, 95% CI 1.03–2.3; P = 0.037), vascular invasion (HR 2.4, 95% CI 1.3–4.4; P = 0.005) and positive surgical margins (HR 4.4, 95% CI 2.3–8.5; P < 0.001). Kaplan–Meier analysis of CSM revealed that the survival of patients with recurrence after PN was significantly better than those with recurrence after RN (P = 0.02). While the above-mentioned risk factors were associated with prognosis, type of surgery alone was not an independent prognostic variable for RFS nor CSM. Limitations include the retrospective nature of the study.Conclusion: Our results showed that follow-up protocols should not rely solely on stage and type of primary surgery. An optimized regimen should also include validated risk factors rather than type of surgery alone to select the best imaging method and to avoid unnecessary imaging. A follow-up of more than 3 years should be considered in patients with pT1 tumours after RN. A novel follow-up strategy is proposed.
|
|
| 2. |
- Abu-Ghanem, Yasmin, et al.
(author)
-
The Impact of Histological Subtype on the Incidence, Timing, and Patterns of Recurrence in Patients with Renal Cell Carcinoma After Surgery : Results from RECUR Consortium
- 2021
-
In: European Urology Oncology. - : Elsevier. - 2588-9311. ; 4:3, s. 473-482
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Current follow-up strategies for patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) after curative surgery rely mainly on risk models and the treatment delivered, regardless of the histological subtype.Objective: To determine the impact of RCC histological subtype on recurrence and to examine the incidence, pattern, and timing of recurrences to improve follow-up recommendations.Design, setting, and participants: This study included consecutive patients treated surgically with curative intention (ie, radical and partial nephrectomy) for nonmetastatic RCC (cT1–4, M0) between January 2006 and December 2011 across 15 centres from 10 countries, as part of the euRopEan association of urology renal cell carcinoma guidelines panel Collaborative multicenter consortium for the studies of follow-Up and recurrence patterns in Radically treated renal cell carcinoma patients (RECUR) database project.Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The impact of histological subtype (ie, clear cell RCC [ccRCC], papillary RCC [pRCC], and chromophobe RCC [chRCC]) on recurrence-free survival (RFS) was assessed via univariate and multivariate analyses, adjusting for potential interactions with important variables (stage, grade, risk score, etc.) Patterns of recurrence for all histological subtypes were compared according to recurrence site and risk criteria.Results and limitations: Of the 3331 patients, 62.2% underwent radical nephrectomy and 37.8% partial nephrectomy. A total of 2565 patients (77.0%) had ccRCC, 535 (16.1%) had pRCC, and 231 (6.9%) had chRCC. The median postoperative follow-up period was 61.7 (interquartile range: 47–83) mo. Patients with ccRCC had significantly poorer 5-yr RFS than patients with pRCC and chRCC (78% vs 86% vs 91%, p = 0.001). The most common sites of recurrence for ccRCC were the lung and bone. Intermediate-/high-risk pRCC patients had an increased rate of lymphatic recurrence, both mediastinal and retroperitoneal, while recurrence in chRCC was rare (8.2%), associated with higher stage and positive margins, and predominantly in the liver and bone. Limitations include the retrospective nature of the study.Conclusions: The main histological subtypes of RCC exhibit a distinct pattern and dynamics of recurrence. Results suggest that intermediate- to high-risk pRCC may benefit from cross-sectional abdominal imaging every 6 mo until 2 yr after surgery, while routine imaging might be abandoned for chRCC except for abdominal computed tomography in patients with advanced tumour stage or positive margins.Patient summary: In this analysis of a large database from 15 countries around Europe, we found that the main histological subtypes of renal cell carcinoma have a distinct pattern and dynamics of recurrence. Patients should be followed differently according to subtype and risk score.
|
|
| 3. |
- Fallara, Giuseppe, et al.
(author)
-
Recurrence pattern in localized RCC : results from a European multicenter database (RECUR)
- 2022
-
In: Urologic Oncology. - : Elsevier. - 1078-1439 .- 1873-2496. ; 40:11, s. 494.e11-494.e17
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Introduction: The impact of open versus minimally invasive surgery on recurrence pattern in the management of localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remains uncertain. We thus aimed to determine the impact of surgical approach on survival and recurrence pattern.Material and methods: This is a multi-institutional, matched cohort study on patients with pT1-3aN0M0 RCC from the RECUR database. After propensity score matching between open and minimally invasive surgery, disease-free (DFS) survival and risk of first recurrence according to recurrence site, namely local recurrence, abdominal/retroperitoneal, thoracic/mediastinal or uncommon site metastases were investigated with Cox regression analysis. Overall (OS) and Cancer Specific Survival (CSS) were also assessed.Results: After matching, 1,019 patients who underwent open and 1,019 who underwent minimally invasive surgery were included (of which 70 robot-assisted). At 5.2 years of median follow-up, 130 patients in open and 125 in minimally invasive group experienced disease progression. A higher risk of local recurrence (HR 2.06; 95% CI 1.18–3.58, P-value = 0.01) and uncommon site metastases (HR 1.09; 95% CI 1.01–1.16; P-value = .04) was found for minimally invasive surgery relative to open surgery, while no difference was found in terms of DFS (HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.64–1.06; P-value = .14). No differences were found in terms of OS and CSS. Main limitation is the retrospective nature of the study.Conclusions: The risk for local recurrence and uncommon site metastases was higher for minimally invasive surgery compared to open surgery, although no differences were found for OS, CSS, and DFS.
|
|
| 4. |
- Lund, Lars, et al.
(author)
-
Use of venous-thrombotic-embolic prophylaxis in patients undergoing surgery for renal tumors : a questionnaire survey in the Nordic countries (The NORENCA-2 study)
- 2018
-
In: Research and Reports in Urology. - : DOVE Medical Press Ltd.. - 2253-2447. ; 10, s. 181-187
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Purpose: To examine the variation in venous thromboembolism prophylactic treatment (VTEP) among renal cancer patients undergoing surgery.Materials and methods: An Internet-based questionnaire on renal tumor management before and after surgery was mailed to all Nordic departments of urology. The questions focused on the use of VTEP and were subdivided into different surgical modalities.Results: Questionnaires were mailed to 91 institutions (response rate 53%). None of the centers used VTEP before surgery, unless the patient had a vena caval tumor thrombus. Overall, the VTEP utilized during hospitalization for patients undergoing renal surgery included early mobilization (45%), compression stockings (52%) and low-molecular-weight heparin (89%). In patients undergoing open radical Nx, 80% of institutions used VTEP during their hospitalization (23% compression stockings and 94% low-molecular-weight heparin). After leaving the hospital, the proportion and type of VTEP received varied considerably across institutions. The most common interval, used in 60% of the institutions, was for a period of 4 weeks. The restriction to the Nordic countries was a limitation and, therefore, may not reflect the practice patterns elsewhere. It is a survey study and, therefore, cannot measure the behaviors of those institutions that did not participate.Conclusion: We found variation in the type and duration of VTEP use for each type of local intervention for renal cancer. These widely disparate variations in care strongly argue for the establishment of national and international guidelines regarding VTEP in renal surgery.
|
|
