Jeong Ho Kim1, Seong Il Seo2, Cheryn Song3, Jinsoo Chung4, Cheol Kwak5, Sung-Hoo Hong6. 1. Department of Urology, Dongnam Institute of Radiological & Medical Sciences Cancer center, Busan, Korea; 2. Department of Urology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea; 3. Department of Urology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea; 4. Department of Urology, Center for Prostate Cancer, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea; 5. Department of Urology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Korea; 6. Department of Urology, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In this retrospective multicentre study, we compared the clinicohistological characteristics of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) between pediatric and adult patients. METHODS: Data for patients who underwent radical or partial nephrectomy for RCC between 1988 and 2014 at multiple institutions were collected. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to age at diagnosis: pediatric patients (age ≤18 years) and adult patients (age ≥40 years). The groups were compared for clinical and pathologic variables, and survival analysis was performed. RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 64 (range: 30-91) months for pediatric patients versus 44 (range: 19-59) months for adult patients (p = 0.026). Pediatric patients were mostly female (p = 0.003), had symptoms at presentation (p < 0.001), and had a high-stage tumour (p = 0.014) than adult patients. Among the symptomatic patients, gross hematuria was the most common symptom. The median tumour size was not different between groups. Regarding histologic types, pediatric patients had more papillary tumours (p < 0.001), more unclassified tumours (p < 0.001), and fewer clear cell carcinomas (p < 0.001). Five-year cancer-specific survival rates were 85% and 87.4% in pediatric and adult patients, respectively (log rank p = 0.901). Recurrence-free survival was better in adult patients, although this did not reach statistical significance (log rank p = 0.272). This study has several limitations, including its retrospective nature and the relatively small number of pediatric RCC cases. CONCLUSION: RCC in children is rare and is characterized by features that differ from those in adult RCC. Prognosis did not differ between groups.
INTRODUCTION: In this retrospective multicentre study, we compared the clinicohistological characteristics of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) between pediatric and adult patients. METHODS: Data for patients who underwent radical or partial nephrectomy for RCC between 1988 and 2014 at multiple institutions were collected. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to age at diagnosis: pediatric patients (age ≤18 years) and adult patients (age ≥40 years). The groups were compared for clinical and pathologic variables, and survival analysis was performed. RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 64 (range: 30-91) months for pediatric patients versus 44 (range: 19-59) months for adult patients (p = 0.026). Pediatric patients were mostly female (p = 0.003), had symptoms at presentation (p < 0.001), and had a high-stage tumour (p = 0.014) than adult patients. Among the symptomatic patients, gross hematuria was the most common symptom. The median tumour size was not different between groups. Regarding histologic types, pediatric patients had more papillary tumours (p < 0.001), more unclassified tumours (p < 0.001), and fewer clear cell carcinomas (p < 0.001). Five-year cancer-specific survival rates were 85% and 87.4% in pediatric and adult patients, respectively (log rank p = 0.901). Recurrence-free survival was better in adult patients, although this did not reach statistical significance (log rank p = 0.272). This study has several limitations, including its retrospective nature and the relatively small number of pediatric RCC cases. CONCLUSION:RCC in children is rare and is characterized by features that differ from those in adult RCC. Prognosis did not differ between groups.
Authors: T Stachowicz-Stencel; E Bien; A Balcerska; J Godzinski; A Synakiewicz; M Perek-Polnik; A Kurylak; W Pietras; M Kuzmicz; A Mizia-Malarz; A Rybczynska; J Nurzynska-Flak Journal: Klin Padiatr Date: 2011-04-20 Impact factor: 1.349
Authors: G Kovacs; M Akhtar; B J Beckwith; P Bugert; C S Cooper; B Delahunt; J N Eble; S Fleming; B Ljungberg; L J Medeiros; H Moch; V E Reuter; E Ritz; G Roos; D Schmidt; J R Srigley; S Störkel; E van den Berg; B Zbar Journal: J Pathol Date: 1997-10 Impact factor: 7.996
Authors: Elisabeth Bruder; Oliver Passera; Dieter Harms; Ivo Leuschner; Marc Ladanyi; Pedram Argani; John N Eble; Kirsten Struckmann; Peter Schraml; Holger Moch Journal: Am J Surg Pathol Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 6.394
Authors: Sebastian L Hofbauer; Michela de Martino; Christoph Seemann; Nura Zamani; Ilaria Lucca; Andrea Haitel; Shahrokh F Shariat; Tobias Klatte Journal: Korean J Urol Date: 2014-08-08