Literature DB >> 20674150

Validation of the 2009 TNM version in a large multi-institutional cohort of patients treated for renal cell carcinoma: are further improvements needed?

Giacomo Novara1, Vincenzo Ficarra, Alessandro Antonelli, Walter Artibani, Roberto Bertini, Marco Carini, Sergio Cosciani Cunico, Ciro Imbimbo, Nicola Longo, Guido Martignoni, Giuseppe Martorana, Andrea Minervini, Vincenzo Mirone, Francesco Montorsi, Riccardo Schiavina, Roberto Schiavina, Claudio Simeone, Sergio Serni, Alchiede Simonato, Salvatore Siracusano, Alessandro Volpe, Giorgio Carmignani.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A new edition of the TNM was recently released that includes modifications for the staging system of kidney cancers. Specifically, T2 cancers were subclassified into T2a and T2b (< or =10 cm vs >10 cm), tumors with renal vein involvement or perinephric fat involvement were classified as T3a cancers, and those with adrenal involvement were classified as T4 cancers.
OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to validate the recently released edition of the TNM staging system for primary tumor classification in kidney cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Our multicenter retrospective study consisted of 5339 patients treated in 16 academic Italian centers. INTERVENTION: Patients underwent either radical or partial nephrectomy. MEASUREMENTS: Univariable and multivariable Cox regression models addressed cancer-specific survival (CSS) after surgery. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: In the study, 1897 patients (35.5%) were classified as pT1a, 1453 (27%) as pT1b, 437 (8%) as pT2a, 153 (3%) as pT2b, 1059 (20%) as pT3a, 117 (2%) as pT3b, 26 (0.5%) as pT3c, and 197 (4%) as pT4. At a median follow-up of 42 mo, 786 (15%) had died of disease. In univariable analysis, patients with pT2b and pT3a tumors had similar CSS, as did patients with pT3c and pT4 tumors. Moreover, both pT3a and pT3b stages included patients with heterogeneous outcomes. In multivariable analysis, the novel classification of the primary tumor was a powerful independent predictor of CSS (p for trend <0.0001). However, the substratification of pT1 tumors did not retain an independent predictive role. The major limitations of the study are retrospective design, lack of central pathologic review, and the small number of patients included in some substages.
CONCLUSIONS: The recently released seventh edition of the primary tumor staging system for kidney tumors is a powerful predictor of CSS. However, some of the substages identified by the classification have overlapping prognoses, and other substages include patients with heterogeneous outcomes. The few modifications included in this edition may have not resolved the most critical issues in the previous version. Copyright 2010 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20674150     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2010.07.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  59 in total

1.  Decision curve analysis and external validation of the postoperative Karakiewicz nomogram for renal cell carcinoma based on a large single-center study cohort.

Authors:  Stefan Zastrow; Sabine Brookman-May; Thi Anh Phuong Cong; Stanislaw Jurk; Immanuel von Bar; Vladimir Novotny; Manfred Wirth
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2014-05-22       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 2.  Should Small Renal Masses Be Biopsied?

Authors:  Ricardo R N Leão; Ardalan E Ahmad; Patrick O Richard
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 3.  Review of renal cell carcinoma and its common subtypes in radiology.

Authors:  Gavin Low; Guan Huang; Winnie Fu; Zaahir Moloo; Safwat Girgis
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2016-05-28

Review 4.  Rare and changeable as a chameleon: paraneoplastic syndromes in renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  M Hegemann; N Kroeger; A Stenzl; J Bedke
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-02-10       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  The use of nephrometry scoring systems can help urologists predict the risk of conversion to radical nephrectomy in patients scheduled for partial nephrectomy.

Authors:  Vincenzo Ficarra; Marta Rossanese; Gianluca Giannarini; Alessandro Crestani; Alchiede Simonato; Antonino Inferrera
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2019-09

6.  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 7.  [Epidemiology and diagnostic assessment of small renal masses].

Authors:  B K Ziegelmüller; A Spek; B Szabados; J Casuscelli; D-A Clevert; M Staehler
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 0.639

8.  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

9.  Expression of chemokine receptor 4 was associated with poor survival in renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Qiang Liu; Mulati Rexiati; Ying Yang; Wen-Guang Wang; Baihetiya Azhati; Weilijiang Saimaiti; Yu-Jie Wang
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2014-02-20       Impact factor: 3.064

10.  The relationship between histopathology and age factor in patients who were operated for renal masses.

Authors:  Taha Numan Yıkılmaz; Okan Baş; Ali İhsan Arık; Fatih Hızlı; Halil Başar
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2015-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.