Literature DB >> 16904438

Reevaluation of TNM staging of renal cortical tumors: recurrence and survival for T1N0M0 and T3aN0M0 tumors are equivalent.

Scott M Gilbert1, Alana M Murphy, Aaron E Katz, Erik T Goluboff, Ihor S Sawczuk, Carl A Olsson, Mitchell C Benson, James M McKiernan.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The current TNM staging system for renal cortical tumors (RCTs) differentiates between tumors confined to the kidney (T1, T2) and tumors that extend through the renal capsule and invade into the perinephric fat (T3a). We examined the relative survival rates of patients with T1 and T3a tumors to determine the accuracy of the current TNM staging classification.
METHODS: We analyzed the Columbia University Surgical Urological Oncology Database for all patients with clinically localized Stage T1, T2, and T3a RCTs treated surgically from 1988 to 2004. The primary outcomes included local and distant recurrence. Because the T3a classification is not limited by size, we compared T3a tumors with T1 tumors alone and tumors confined within the renal capsule (Stage T1 and T2 tumors combined).
RESULTS: A total of 819 patients underwent partial or radical nephrectomy for RCTs at Columbia University during the study period. After the exclusion criteria were applied, 131 patients with T1N0M0, 19 patients with T2N0M0, and 82 patients with T3aN0M0 conventional renal cell carcinoma were eligible for analysis. The median follow-up was 37 months. The median tumor diameter was 3.2, 3.8, and 5.0 cm for Stage T1, T1 and T2 combined, and T3a lesions, respectively. The estimated 5-year disease-free survival was 95.2% and 90.6% for T1 and T3a RCTs, respectively (P = 0.922).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with Stage T3a tumors experienced similar outcomes as patients with tumors confined to the renal capsule. These data suggest that the T3a classification should be examined more closely to attempt to improve the prognostic validity of the TNM classification.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16904438     DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2006.02.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Urology        ISSN: 0090-4295            Impact factor:   2.649


  8 in total

Review 1.  Prognostic and Predictive Factors for Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  Cristina Suárez; Marc Campayo; Romà Bastús; Sergi Castillo; Olatz Etxanitz; Marta Guix; Núria Sala; Enrique Gallardo
Journal:  Target Oncol       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 4.493

2.  Prognostic Evaluation of the Site of Invasion in Pathological Stage T3a Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  Gu-Shun Lai; Jian-Ri Li; Shian-Shiang Wang; Chuan-Shu Chen; Chun-Kuang Yang; Sheng-Chun Hung; Chen-Li Cheng; Yen-Chuan Ou; Kun-Yuan Chiu
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2021 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.155

Review 3.  The changing face of renal cell carcinoma pathology.

Authors:  Hakan Aydin; Ming Zhou
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 5.075

4.  Prognostic significance of perirenal infiltration in renal cell carcinoma (<7 cm).

Authors:  Seongyub Oh; Jangho Yoon; Dongil Kang; Heung Lae Cho; Jae-il Chung
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 2.759

5.  Approach to the small renal mass: weighing treatment options.

Authors:  Brian M Benway; Sam B Bhayani
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 3.092

6.  [Urological therapy of renal cell cancer].

Authors:  Wolfgang Ferber; Paul Schramek
Journal:  Wien Med Wochenschr       Date:  2008

7.  Staging of renal cell carcinoma: Current concepts.

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

8.  The prognostic value of fat invasion and tumor expansion in the hilar veins in pT3a renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Viktoria Stühler; Steffen Rausch; Katharina Kroll; Marcus Scharpf; Arnulf Stenzl; Jens Bedke
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-02-27       Impact factor: 4.226

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.