Reassessment of American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging for Stage III Renal Cell Carcinoma With Nodal Involvement: Propensity Score Matched Analyses of a Large Population-Based Study

Overview

Journal Front Oncol

Specialty Oncology

Date 2020 Apr 9

PMID 32266145

Citations 1

Authors

Jianglong Han

Qin Li

Ping Li

Shijie Wang

Rui Zhang

Yunfeng Qiao

Qibin Song

Zhenming Fu

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

To assess the role of nodal involvement in stage III renal cell carcinoma (RCC) according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 8th staging system. We compared the survival outcomes of RCC patients with pTNM disease and those with pTNM or stage IV (stratified as pTNM and pTNM) disease in a large population-based cohort. A cohort of 3,112 eligible patients with RCC was identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, registered between January 2004 and December 2015. Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the overall survival (OS), and cancer-specific survival (CSS). The prognostic value of the modified stage for pTNM disease was assessed by nomogram-based analyses. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to adjust for potential baseline confounding. Patients with pTNM disease showed similar survival outcomes (median OS 41.0 vs. 38.0 months, = 0.77; CSS 45.0 vs. 39.0 months, = 0.59) to pTNM patients, whereas the significantly better survival outcome was found for pTNM patients. After PSM, comparable survival rates were observed between pTNM group and pTNM group, which were still significantly worse than the survival of pTNM patients. The modified stage IIIA (pTNM), IIIB (pTNM, pTNM), and IV (pTNM) showed higher predictive accuracy than AJCC stage system in the nomogram-based analyses (concordance index: 0.70 vs. 0.68, < 0.001 for OS; 0.71 vs. 0.69, < 0.001 for CSS). The pTNM RCC might be reclassified as stage IIIB together with pTNM disease for better prediction of prognosis, further examination and validation are warranted.

Citing Articles

To Be or "Node" to Be: Nodal Disease and the Role of Lymphadenectomy in the Treatment of Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Patel H, Srivastava A, Singer E Med Res Arch. 2020; 8(5).

PMID: 32582841 PMC: 7314371. DOI: 10.18103/mra.v8i5.2091.

References

Lughezzani G, Capitanio U, Jeldres C, Isbarn H, Shariat S, Arjane P . Prognostic significance of lymph node invasion in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a population-based perspective. Cancer. 2009; 115(24):5680-7. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.24682. View

Hollingsworth J, Miller D, Daignault S, Hollenbeck B . Five-year survival after surgical treatment for kidney cancer: a population-based competing risk analysis. Cancer. 2007; 109(9):1763-8. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.22600. View

Trinh Q, Schmitges J, Bianchi M, Sun M, Shariat S, Sammon J . Node-positive renal cell carcinoma in the absence of distant metastases: predictors of cancer-specific mortality in a population-based cohort. BJU Int. 2011; 110(2 Pt 2):E21-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10701.x. View

Yu K, Keskin S, Meissner M, Petros F, Wang X, Borregales L . Renal cell carcinoma and pathologic nodal disease: Implications for American Joint Committee on Cancer staging. Cancer. 2018; 124(20):4023-4031. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.31661. View

Tilki D, Chandrasekar T, Capitanio U, Ciancio G, Daneshmand S, Gontero P . Impact of lymph node dissection at the time of radical nephrectomy with tumor thrombectomy on oncological outcomes: Results from the International Renal Cell Carcinoma-Venous Thrombus Consortium (IRCC-VTC). Urol Oncol. 2017; 36(2):79.e11-79.e17. PMC: 8404533. DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2017.10.008. View

Blute M, Leibovich B, Cheville J, Lohse C, Zincke H . A protocol for performing extended lymph node dissection using primary tumor pathological features for patients treated with radical nephrectomy for clear cell renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. 2004; 172(2):465-9. DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000129815.91927.85. View

Pu N, Li J, Xu Y, Lee W, Fang Y, Han X . Comparison of prognostic prediction between nomogram based on lymph node ratio and AJCC 8th staging system for patients with resected pancreatic head carcinoma: a SEER analysis. Cancer Manag Res. 2018; 10:227-238. PMC: 5804271. DOI: 10.2147/CMAR.S157940. View

Pantuck A, Zisman A, Dorey F, Chao D, Han K, Said J . Renal cell carcinoma with retroperitoneal lymph nodes: role of lymph node dissection. J Urol. 2003; 169(6):2076-83. DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000066130.27119.1c. View

Lam J, Shvarts O, Pantuck A . Changing concepts in the surgical management of renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol. 2004; 45(6):692-705. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2004.02.002. View

10.

Pizzocaro G, Piva L . Pros and cons of retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy in operable renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol. 1990; 18 Suppl 2:22-3. DOI: 10.1159/000463953. View

11.

Joslyn S, Sirintrapun S, Konety B . Impact of lymphadenectomy and nodal burden in renal cell carcinoma: retrospective analysis of the National Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Urology. 2005; 65(4):675-80. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2004.10.068. View

12.

Wang Y, Li J, Xia Y, Gong R, Wang K, Yan Z . Prognostic nomogram for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma after partial hepatectomy. J Clin Oncol. 2013; 31(9):1188-95. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2012.41.5984. View

13.

Canfield S, Kamat A, Sanchez-Ortiz R, Detry M, Swanson D, Wood C . Renal cell carcinoma with nodal metastases in the absence of distant metastatic disease (clinical stage TxN1-2M0): the impact of aggressive surgical resection on patient outcome. J Urol. 2006; 175(3 Pt 1):864-9. DOI: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)00334-4. View

14.

Capitanio U, Jeldres C, Patard J, Perrotte P, Zini L, De La Taille A . Stage-specific effect of nodal metastases on survival in patients with non-metastatic renal cell carcinoma. BJU Int. 2008; 103(1):33-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.08014.x. View

15.

Ravaud A, Motzer R, Pandha H, George D, Pantuck A, Patel A . Adjuvant Sunitinib in High-Risk Renal-Cell Carcinoma after Nephrectomy. N Engl J Med. 2016; 375(23):2246-2254. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1611406. View

16.

Miller L, Stemkowski S, Saverno K, Lane D, Tao Z, Hackshaw M . Patterns of Care in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Among a U.S. Payer Population with Commercial or Medicare Advantage Membership. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2016; 22(3):219-26. PMC: 10397977. DOI: 10.18553/jmcp.2016.22.3.219. View

17.

Srivastava A, Rivera-Nunez Z, Kim S, Sterling J, Farber N, Radadia K . Impact of pathologic lymph node-positive renal cell carcinoma on survival in patients without metastasis: Evidence in support of expanding the definition of stage IV kidney cancer. Cancer. 2020; 126(13):2991-3001. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.32912. View

18.

Terrone C, Cracco C, Porpiglia F, Bollito E, Scoffone C, Poggio M . Reassessing the current TNM lymph node staging for renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol. 2006; 49(2):324-31. DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2005.11.014. View

19.

Capitanio U, Suardi N, Matloob R, Roscigno M, Abdollah F, Di Trapani E . Extent of lymph node dissection at nephrectomy affects cancer-specific survival and metastatic progression in specific sub-categories of patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). BJU Int. 2014; 114(2):210-5. DOI: 10.1111/bju.12508. View

20.

Sun M, Bianchi M, Hansen J, Abdollah F, Trinh Q, Lughezzani G . Nodal involvement at nephrectomy is associated with worse survival: a stage-for-stage and grade-for-grade analysis. Int J Urol. 2012; 20(4):372-80. DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2012.03170.x. View