Literature DB >> 15643175

pT2 classification for renal cell carcinoma. Can its accuracy be improved?

Igor Frank1, Michael L Blute, Bradley C Leibovich, John C Cheville, Christine M Lohse, Eugene D Kwon, Horst Zincke.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The 2002 tumor classification for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) classifies pT2 tumors as more than 7 cm in greatest dimension, limited to the kidney. In this study we determined whether a size cutoff point exists within pT2 tumors and whether such subclassification would further improve the accuracy of the current tumor classification.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied 544 patients with unilateral, sporadic pT2 RCC treated with radical nephrectomy or nephron sparing surgery between 1970 and 2000. The association of tumor size with death from RCC was examined using martingale residuals from a Cox proportional hazards regression model to determine the optimal size cutoff point.
RESULTS: There were 204 deaths from RCC a median of 3.8 years following nephrectomy. Univariately tumor size was significantly associated with death from RCC (risk ratio 1.08, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.13, p <0.001). A scatterplot of tumor size vs expected risk of death per patient suggested that a cutoff point between 9 and 10 cm was appropriate. When adjusted for regional lymph node involvement and distant metastases, the 10 cm cutoff point performed better than the 9 cm point (risk ratio 1.42, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.90, p = 0.017 vs 1.22, 95% 0.86 to 1.72, p = 0.268). Therefore, we propose using a 10 cm cutoff point to subclassify patients into pT2a and pT2b.
CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that the prognostic accuracy of the 2002 pT2 tumor classification can be further improved by subclassifying patients with tumors greater than 7 and less than 10 cm into a pT2a category, and those with tumors 10 cm or greater into a pT2b category.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15643175     DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000149937.75566.ac

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  6 in total

1.  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

2.  Clinical and prognostic factors for renal parenchymal, pelvis, and ureter cancers in SEER registries: collaborative stage data collection system, version 2.

Authors:  Sean F Altekruse; Lois Dickie; Xiao-Cheng Wu; Mei-Chin Hsieh; Manxia Wu; Richard Lee; Scott Delacroix
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2014-12-01       Impact factor: 6.860

3.  An evaluation of prognostic factors and tumor staging of resected carcinoma of the esophagus.

Authors:  Bas P L Wijnhoven; Khe T C Tran; Adrian Esterman; David I Watson; Hugo W Tilanus
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 4.  Risk stratification and prognostication of renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Vincenzo Ficarra; Antonio Galfano; Giacomo Novara; Massimo Iafrate; Matteo Brunelli; Silvia Secco; Stefano Cavalleri; Guido Martignoni; Walter Artibani
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2008-04-08       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  TIMP-1 as well as Microvessel Invasion and High Nuclear Grade Is a Significant Determinant Factor for Extension of Tumor Diameter in Localized RCC.

Authors:  Nozomu Kawata; Kenya Yamaguchi; Tomohiro Igarashi; Satoru Takahashi
Journal:  J Oncol       Date:  2016-02-25       Impact factor: 4.375

6.  Staging of renal cell carcinoma: Current concepts.

Authors:  John S Lam; Tobias Klatte; Alberto Breda
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2009 Oct-Dec
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.