» Articles » PMID: 33542395

Prognostic Significance of Pathologic Nodal Positivity in Non-metastatic Patients with Renal Cell Carcinoma Who Underwent Radical or Partial Nephrectomy

Overview
Journal Sci Rep
Specialty Science
Date 2021 Feb 5
PMID 33542395
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

This retrospective, five-multicenter study was aimed to evaluate the prognostic impact of pathologic nodal positivity on recurrence-free (RFS), metastasis-free (MFS), overall (OS), and cancer-specific (CSS) survivals in patients with non-metastatic renal cell carcinoma (nmRCC) who underwent either radical or partial nephrectomy with/without LN dissection. A total of 4236 nmRCC patients was enrolled between 2000 and 2012, and followed up through the end of 2017. Survival measures were compared between 52 (1.2%) stage pT1-4N1 (LN+) patients and 4184 (98.8%) stage pT1-4N0 (LN-) patients using Kaplan-Meier analysis with the log-rank test and Cox regression analysis to determine the prognostic risk factors for each survival measure. During the median 43.8-month follow-up, 410 (9.7%) recurrences, 141 (3.3%) metastases, and 351 (8.3%) deaths, including 212 (5.0%) cancer-specific deaths, were reported. The risk factor analyses showed that predictive factors for RFS, CSS, and OS were similar, whereas those of MFS were not. After adjusting for significant clinical factors affecting survival outcomes considering the hazard ratios (HR) of each group, the LN+ group, even those with low pT stage, had similar to or worse survival outcomes than the pT3N0 (LN-) group in multivariable analysis and had significantly more relationship with RFS than MFS. All survival measures were significantly worse in pT1-2N1 patients (MFS/RFS/OS/CSS; HR 4.12/HR 3.19/HR 4.41/HR 7.22) than in pT3-4N0 patients (HR 3.08/HR 2.92/HR 2.09/HR 3.73). Therefore, LN+ had an impact on survival outcomes worse than pT3-4N0 and significantly affected local recurrence rather than distant metastasis compared to LN- in nmRCC after radical or partial nephrectomy.

Citing Articles

Non-coding transcriptome profiles in clear-cell renal cell carcinoma.

Tesarova T, Fiala O, Hora M, Vaclavikova R Nat Rev Urol. 2024; 22(3):151-174.

PMID: 39242964 DOI: 10.1038/s41585-024-00926-3.

References
1.
Ljungberg B, Alamdari F, Rasmuson T, Roos G . Follow-up guidelines for nonmetastatic renal cell carcinoma based on the occurrence of metastases after radical nephrectomy. BJU Int. 1999; 84(4):405-11. DOI: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.1999.00202.x. View

2.
Lee S, Sung H, Jeon H, Jeong B, Jeon S, Lee H . Size and Volumetric Growth Kinetics of Renal Masses in Patients With Renal Cell Carcinoma. Urology. 2016; 90:119-24. DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2015.10.051. View

3.
Paparel P, Bigot P, Matillon X, Bensalah K, Salomon L, Baumert H . Local recurrence after radical nephrectomy for kidney cancer: management and prediction of outcomes. a multi-institutional study. J Surg Oncol. 2013; 109(2):126-31. DOI: 10.1002/jso.23473. View

4.
Moschini M, Delloglio P, Larcher A, Capitanio U . Lymph node dissection for renal cell carcinoma: what are we missing?. Curr Opin Urol. 2016; 26(5):424-31. DOI: 10.1097/MOU.0000000000000312. View

5.
Martinez Chanza N, Tripathi A, Harshman L . Adjuvant Therapy Options in Renal Cell Carcinoma: Where Do We Stand?. Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2019; 20(5):44. DOI: 10.1007/s11864-019-0639-0. View