Literature DB >> 11857297

Prognostic importance of tumor size for localized conventional (clear cell) renal cell carcinoma: assessment of TNM T1 and T2 tumor categories and comparison with other prognostic parameters.

Brett Delahunt1, John M Kittelson, Margaret R E McCredie, Anthony E Reeve, John H Stewart, A Michael Bilous.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The T1 and T2 classifications of the International Union Against Cancer TNM classification system for renal cell carcinoma are based on primary tumor size, and in various editions of the classification, the cut points between T1 and T2 have been amended to provide clinical utility. In the current edition, the T1/T2 cut point is less than or equal to and greater than 7 cm. and more recently a subdivision of the T1 classification (less than or equal to and < 4 cm) has been proposed to identify patients suitable for partial nephrectomy. This study investigates the prognostic significance of tumor size in a series of organ-confined clear cell renal cell carcinomas.
METHODS: One hundred thirty cases of organ-confined clear cell renal cell carcinomas, with a minimum of 5 years' follow-up, were identified from the New South Wales Cancer Registry. Tumor size was compared with survival using the method of Kaplan and Meier for TNM size categories, and proportional hazards regression was used for assessing size as a continuous variable. Proportional hazards regression also was used for multivariable comparisons of size and other prognostic parameters (Fuhrman grade, AgNOR score, and Ki-67 index) against survival.
RESULTS: Of 116 cases for which tumor dimension was recorded, 25 patients had died of cancer-related causes. Primary tumor size ranged from 12 to 140 mm (mean, 57.3 mm). The association between survival and size was significant irrespective of the TNM classification and was also significant when size was modeled continuously (P = 0.000125, hazard of death increased by 3.51 times for each doubling of tumor size). On univariate analysis, Fuhrman grade (P = 0.04) and AgNOR score (P = 0.015) were associated with survival; however, on multivariate analysis only tumor size retained significance.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the cut point of T1 and T2 TNM categories and the proposed T1 subdivision cut point correlate with survival, our finding that size is a continuous variable indicates that as a prognostic parameter for clear cell renal cell carcinoma, primary tumor size is relative rather than indicative. Copyright 2002 American Cancer Society. DOI 10.1002/cncr.10255

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11857297     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.10255

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  12 in total

1.  Impact of tumor size on the long-term survival of patients with early stage renal cell cancer.

Authors:  M Kuczyk; G Wegener; A S Merseburger; A Anastasiadis; S Machtens; A Zumbrägel; J T Hartmann; C Bokemeyer; Udo Jonas; A Stenzl
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2005-02-24       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 2.  Prognostic factors in renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Alessandro Volpe; Jean Jacques Patard
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2010-04-03       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  Validation of the 2009 TNM Classification for Renal Cell Carcinoma: Comparison with the 2002 TNM Classification by Concordance Index.

Authors:  Chunwoo Lee; Dalsan You; Junsoo Park; In Gab Jeong; Cheryn Song; Jun Hyuk Hong; Hanjong Ahn; Choung-Soo Kim
Journal:  Korean J Urol       Date:  2011-08-22

Review 4.  Best Practice No 180. Nephrectomy for renal tumour; dissection guide and dataset.

Authors:  S Fleming; D F R Griffiths
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 3.411

5.  Overexpression of IL-32 is a novel prognostic factor in patients with localized clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Hyun-Jung Lee; Zhe Long Liang; Song Mei Huang; Jae-Sung Lim; DO-Young Yoon; Hyo-Jin Lee; Jin Man Kim
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2011-12-02       Impact factor: 2.967

6.  [Renal cell carcinoma. Comparative analysis of the prognostic significance of the WHO-classification and the Störkel's prognostic score].

Authors:  S Gunia; M May; K Korb; P Stosiek
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 0.639

7.  Prognostic significance of platelet-derived growth factor receptor-β expression in localized clear cell renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Myungsun Shim; Cheryn Song; Sejun Park; Seung-Kwon Choi; Yong Mee Cho; Choung-Soo Kim; Hanjong Ahn
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-07-28       Impact factor: 4.553

Review 8.  Watchful waiting for small renal masses.

Authors:  Kamal Mattar; Michael A S Jewett
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 9.  Nephron-sparing surgery for multifocal and hereditary renal tumors.

Authors:  Adam R Metwalli; William M Linehan
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 2.309

10.  Differential expression of prognostic proteomic markers in primary tumour, venous tumour thrombus and metastatic renal cell cancer tissue and correlation with patient outcome.

Authors:  Alexander Laird; Fiach C O'Mahony; Jyoti Nanda; Antony C P Riddick; Marie O'Donnell; David J Harrison; Grant D Stewart
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-04-05       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.