Survival Outcomes After Radical and Partial Nephrectomy for Clinical T2 Renal Tumours Categorised by R.E.N.A.L. Nephrometry Score
Authors
Affiliations
Objective: We evaluated survival outcomes of partial nephrectomy (PN) and radical nephrectomy (RN) for clinical T2 renal masses (cT2RM) controlling for R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score.
Patients And Methods: A two-centre study comprised of 202 patients with cT2RM who underwent RN (122) or PN (80) between July 2002 and June 2012 (median follow-up 41.5 months). Kaplan-Meier analysis compared overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and progression-free survival (PFS) among the entire cohort and within categories of R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score of ≥10 and <10. Association between procedure and PFS and OS was analysed using Cox-proportional hazard.
Results: There were no significant differences between PN and RN in clinical T stage and R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry scores. For RN and PN, the 5-year PFS was 69.8% and 79.9% (P = 0.115), CSS was 82.5% and 86.7% (P = 0.407), and OS was 80% and 83.3% (P = 0.291). Cox regression showed no association between RN vs PN and PFS; a R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score of ≥10 was associated with a shorter PFS (hazard ratio 6.69, P = 0.002). Kaplan-Meier analysis for RN vs PN showed no difference in PFS for entire cohort or within the R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score categories of ≥10 and <10. The PFS was better for those with R.E.N.A.L nephrometry scores of <10 vs ≥10 (P < 0.001) and for cT2a vs cT2b tumours (P = 0.012). OS was no different between cT2a and cT2b tumours; patients with R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry scores of ≥10 were more likely to die from disease (P < 0.001) or any cause (P < 0.001) vs those with R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry scores of <10.
Conclusions: PN may be oncologically effective for cT2RM. A R.E.N.A.L nephrometry score of ≥10 is negatively associated with OS among cT2RM compared with a score of <10 and provides additional risk assessment beyond clinical T stage. Further follow-up and prospective randomised investigation is requisite to confirm efficacy of PN for cT2RM.
Yao Y, Liu Y, Yang T, Lu B, Yang X, Zhang H Cancer Med. 2024; 13(12):e7336.
PMID: 39651783 PMC: 11192648. DOI: 10.1002/cam4.7336.
Song Z, Xing J, Sun Z, Kang X, Li H, Ren G Front Surg. 2024; 11:1370702.
PMID: 38742149 PMC: 11089187. DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2024.1370702.
Okhawere K, Pandav K, Grauer R, Wilson M, Saini I, Korn T J Robot Surg. 2023; 17(5):2451-2460.
PMID: 37470910 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-023-01664-1.
Dhanji S, Wang L, Liu F, Meagher M, Saidian A, Derweesh I Res Rep Urol. 2023; 15:99-108.
PMID: 36879830 PMC: 9985462. DOI: 10.2147/RRU.S326987.
Heidar N, Hakam N, El-Asmar J, Najdi J, Khauli M, Degheili J Arab J Urol. 2022; 20(3):115-120.
PMID: 35935911 PMC: 9354629. DOI: 10.1080/2090598X.2022.2064041.