Borje Ljungberg1, Karim Bensalah2, Steven Canfield3, Saeed Dabestani4, Fabian Hofmann5, Milan Hora6, Markus A Kuczyk7, Thomas Lam8, Lorenzo Marconi9, Axel S Merseburger7, Peter Mulders10, Thomas Powles11, Michael Staehler12, Alessandro Volpe13, Axel Bex14. 1. Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Urology and Andrology, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden. 2. Department of Urology, University of Rennes, Rennes, France. 3. Division of Urology, University of Texas Medical School at Houston, Houston, TX, USA. 4. Department of Urology, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden. 5. Department of Urology, Sunderby Hospital, Sunderby, Sweden. 6. Department of Urology, Faculty Hospital and Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic. 7. Department of Urology and Urologic Oncology, Hanover University Medical School, Hanover, Germany. 8. Academic Urology Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK. 9. Department of Urology, Coimbra University Hospital, Coimbra, Portugal. 10. Department of Urology, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 11. Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, St. Bartholomew's Hospital, London, UK. 12. Urologische Klinik, Klinikum der Ludwig-Maximilians Universität, Munich, Germany. 13. Division of Urology, Maggiore della Carità Hospital, University of Eastern Piedmont, Novara, Italy. 14. Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Electronic address: a.bex@nki.nl.
Abstract
CONTEXT: The European Association of Urology Guideline Panel for Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) has prepared evidence-based guidelines and recommendations for RCC management. OBJECTIVES: To provide an update of the 2010 RCC guideline based on a standardised methodology that is robust, transparent, reproducible, and reliable. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: For the 2014 update, the panel prioritised the following topics: percutaneous biopsy of renal masses, treatment of localised RCC (including surgical and nonsurgical management), lymph node dissection, management of venous thrombus, systemic therapy, and local treatment of metastases, for which evidence synthesis was undertaken based on systematic reviews adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Relevant databases (Medline, Cochrane Library, trial registries, conference proceedings) were searched (January 2000 to November 2013) including randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective or controlled studies with a comparator arm. Risk of bias (RoB) assessment and qualitative and quantitative synthesis of the evidence were performed. The remaining sections of the document were updated following a structured literature assessment. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: All chapters of the RCC guideline were updated. For the various systematic reviews, the search identified a total of 10,862 articles. A total of 151 studies reporting on 78,792 patients were eligible for inclusion; where applicable, data from RCTs were included and meta-analyses were performed. For RCTs, there was low RoB across studies; however, clinical and methodological heterogeneity prevented data pooling for most studies. The majority of studies included were retrospective with matched or unmatched cohorts based on single or multi-institutional data or national registries. The exception was for systemic treatment of metastatic RCC, in which several RCTs have been performed, resulting in recommendations based on higher levels of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The 2014 guideline has been updated by a multidisciplinary panel using the highest methodological standards, and provides the best and most reliable contemporary evidence base for RCC management. PATIENT SUMMARY: The European Association of Urology Guideline Panel for Renal Cell Carcinoma has thoroughly evaluated available research data on kidney cancer to establish international standards for the care of kidney cancer patients.
CONTEXT: The European Association of Urology Guideline Panel for Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) has prepared evidence-based guidelines and recommendations for RCC management. OBJECTIVES: To provide an update of the 2010 RCC guideline based on a standardised methodology that is robust, transparent, reproducible, and reliable. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: For the 2014 update, the panel prioritised the following topics: percutaneous biopsy of renal masses, treatment of localised RCC (including surgical and nonsurgical management), lymph node dissection, management of venous thrombus, systemic therapy, and local treatment of metastases, for which evidence synthesis was undertaken based on systematic reviews adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Relevant databases (Medline, Cochrane Library, trial registries, conference proceedings) were searched (January 2000 to November 2013) including randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective or controlled studies with a comparator arm. Risk of bias (RoB) assessment and qualitative and quantitative synthesis of the evidence were performed. The remaining sections of the document were updated following a structured literature assessment. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: All chapters of the RCC guideline were updated. For the various systematic reviews, the search identified a total of 10,862 articles. A total of 151 studies reporting on 78,792 patients were eligible for inclusion; where applicable, data from RCTs were included and meta-analyses were performed. For RCTs, there was low RoB across studies; however, clinical and methodological heterogeneity prevented data pooling for most studies. The majority of studies included were retrospective with matched or unmatched cohorts based on single or multi-institutional data or national registries. The exception was for systemic treatment of metastatic RCC, in which several RCTs have been performed, resulting in recommendations based on higher levels of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The 2014 guideline has been updated by a multidisciplinary panel using the highest methodological standards, and provides the best and most reliable contemporary evidence base for RCC management. PATIENT SUMMARY: The European Association of Urology Guideline Panel for Renal Cell Carcinoma has thoroughly evaluated available research data on kidney cancer to establish international standards for the care of kidney cancerpatients.
Authors: Benjamin T Ristau; Judi Manola; Naomi B Haas; Daniel Y C Heng; Edward M Messing; Christopher G Wood; Christopher J Kane; Robert S DiPaola; Robert G Uzzo Journal: J Urol Date: 2017-07-18 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Ercan Malkoc; Daniel Ramirez; Onder Kara; Matthew J Maurice; Ryan J Nelson; Peter A Caputo; Jihad H Kaouk Journal: World J Urol Date: 2016-09-23 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Steffen Lebentrau; Sven Rauter; Daniel Baumunk; Frank Christoph; Frank König; Matthias May; Martin Schostak Journal: World J Urol Date: 2016-08-12 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Igor Duquesne; Rafael Sanchez-Salas; Konstantinos Zannis; Richard Berry; Lee Nguyen; Eric Barret; Aude Fregeville; Pierre Validire; Xavier Cathelineau Journal: Curr Urol Rep Date: 2016-12 Impact factor: 3.092