I Wolff1, M May2, B Hoschke3, R Zigeuner4, L Cindolo5, G Hutterer4, L Schips5, O De Cobelli6, B Rocco7, C De Nunzio8, A Tubaro8, I Coman9, B Feciche9, M Truss10, O Dalpiaz4, R S Figenshau11, K Madison11, M Sánchez-Chapado12, M D C Santiago Martin12, L Salzano13, G Lotrecchiano13, S F Shariat14, M Hohenfellner15, R Waidelich16, C Stief16, K Miller17, S Pahernik15, S Brookman-May16. 1. Carl-Thiem-Klinikum Cottbus, Department of Urology, Cottbus, Germany. Electronic address: i.wolff@ctk.de. 2. St. Elisabeth-Klinikum Straubing, Department of Urology, Straubing, Germany. 3. Carl-Thiem-Klinikum Cottbus, Department of Urology, Cottbus, Germany. 4. Medizinische Universität zu Graz, Department of Urology, Graz, Austria. 5. Pio Da Pietrelcina Hospital, Department of Urology, Vasto, Italy. 6. European Institute of Oncology, Division of Urology, Milan, Italy. 7. Università degli Studi di Milano, Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda, Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Department of Urology, Milan, Italy. 8. Faculty of Health Sciences, University "La Sapienza", Ospedale Sant'Andrea, Department of Urology, Rome, Italy. 9. Clinical Municipal Hospital, Department of Urology, Cluj-Napoca, Romania. 10. Klinikum Dortmund, Department of Urology, Dortmund, Germany. 11. Washington University School of Medicine, Department of Surgery, Division of Urologic Surgery, St. Louis, Washington, USA. 12. Hospital Universitario Principe de Asturias, Alcala de Henares, Department of Urology, Madrid, Spain. 13. G. Rummo Hospital, Department of Urology, Benevento, Italy. 14. Medical University of Vienna, Department of Urology, Vienna, Austria. 15. Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Department of Urology, Heidelberg, Germany. 16. Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Department of Urology, Munich, Germany. 17. Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Department of Urology, Berlin, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Since there is still an unmet need for potent adjuvant strategies for renal cancer patients with high progression risk after surgery, several targeted therapies are currently evaluated in this setting. We analyzed whether inclusion criteria of contemporary trials (ARISER, ASSURE, SORCE, EVEREST, PROTECT, S-TRAC, ATLAS) correctly identify high-risk patients. METHODS: The study group comprised 8873 patients of the international CORONA-database after surgery for non-metastatic renal cancer without any adjuvant treatment. Patients were divided into potentially eligible high-risk and assumable low-risk patients who didn't meet inclusion criteria of contemporary adjuvant clinical trials. The ability of various inclusion criteria for disease-free survival (DFS) prediction was evaluated by Harrell's c-index. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 53 months 15.2% of patients experienced recurrence (5-year-DFS 84%). By application of trial inclusion criteria, 24% (S-TRAC) to 47% (SORCE) of patients would have been eligible for enrollment. Actual recurrence rates of eligible patients ranged between 29% (SORCE) and 37% (S-TRAC) opposed to <10% in excluded patients. Highest Hazard Ratio for selection criteria was proven for the SORCE-trial (HR 6.42; p < 0.001), while ASSURE and EVEREST reached the highest c-index for DFS prediction (both 0.73). In a separate multivariate Cox-model, two risk-groups were identified with a maximum difference in 5-year-DFS (94% vs. 61%). CONCLUSION: Results of contemporary adjuvant clinical trials will not be comparable as inclusion criteria differ significantly. Risk assessment according to our model might improve patient selection in clinical trials by defining a high-risk group (28% of all patients) with a 5-year-recurrence rate of almost 40%.
BACKGROUND: Since there is still an unmet need for potent adjuvant strategies for renal cancerpatients with high progression risk after surgery, several targeted therapies are currently evaluated in this setting. We analyzed whether inclusion criteria of contemporary trials (ARISER, ASSURE, SORCE, EVEREST, PROTECT, S-TRAC, ATLAS) correctly identify high-risk patients. METHODS: The study group comprised 8873 patients of the international CORONA-database after surgery for non-metastatic renal cancer without any adjuvant treatment. Patients were divided into potentially eligible high-risk and assumable low-risk patients who didn't meet inclusion criteria of contemporary adjuvant clinical trials. The ability of various inclusion criteria for disease-free survival (DFS) prediction was evaluated by Harrell's c-index. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 53 months 15.2% of patients experienced recurrence (5-year-DFS 84%). By application of trial inclusion criteria, 24% (S-TRAC) to 47% (SORCE) of patients would have been eligible for enrollment. Actual recurrence rates of eligible patients ranged between 29% (SORCE) and 37% (S-TRAC) opposed to <10% in excluded patients. Highest Hazard Ratio for selection criteria was proven for the SORCE-trial (HR 6.42; p < 0.001), while ASSURE and EVEREST reached the highest c-index for DFS prediction (both 0.73). In a separate multivariate Cox-model, two risk-groups were identified with a maximum difference in 5-year-DFS (94% vs. 61%). CONCLUSION: Results of contemporary adjuvant clinical trials will not be comparable as inclusion criteria differ significantly. Risk assessment according to our model might improve patient selection in clinical trials by defining a high-risk group (28% of all patients) with a 5-year-recurrence rate of almost 40%.
Authors: James J Hsieh; Mark P Purdue; Sabina Signoretti; Charles Swanton; Laurence Albiges; Manuela Schmidinger; Daniel Y Heng; James Larkin; Vincenzo Ficarra Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2017-03-09 Impact factor: 52.329
Authors: María Virumbrales-Muñoz; Jose M Ayuso; Jack R Loken; Kathryn M Denecke; Shujah Rehman; Melissa C Skala; E Jason Abel; David J Beebe Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2022-03-11 Impact factor: 15.304
Authors: Marco Bandini; Ariane Smith; Emanuele Zaffuto; Raisa S Pompe; Michele Marchioni; Umberto Capitanio; Felix K Chun; Anil B Kapoor; Shahrokh F Shariat; Francesco Montorsi; Alberto Briganti; Pierre I Karakiewicz Journal: World J Urol Date: 2017-10-11 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Stênio de Cássio Zequi; Walter Henriques da Costa; Fernando Korkes; Rodolfo Borges Dos Reis; Wilson Francisco Schreiner Busato; Wagner Eduardo Matheus; Deusdedit Cortez Vieira da Silva Neto; Felipe de Almeida E Paula; Gustavo Franco Carvalhal; Lucas Nogueira; Roni de Carvalho Fernandes; Adriano Gonçalves E Silva; André Deeke Sasse; André P Fay; Denis Leonardo Jardim; Diogo Assed Bastos; Diogo Augusto Rodrigues da Rosa; Evanius Wierman; Fabio Kater; Fabio A Schutz; Fernando Cotait Maluf; Fernando Nunes Galvão de Oliveira; Igor Alexandre Protzner Morbeck; José Augusto Rinck; Karine Martins da Trindade; Manuel Caitano Maia; Vinicius Carrera Souza; Fernando Sabino Marques Monteiro; Andrey Soares Journal: Ther Adv Urol Date: 2019-09-09
Authors: Debebe Theodros; Benjamin M Murter; John-William Sidhom; Thomas R Nirschl; David J Clark; LiJun Chen; Ada J Tam; Richard L Blosser; Zeyad R Schwen; Michael H Johnson; Phillip M Pierorazio; Hui Zhang; Sudipto Ganguly; Drew M Pardoll; Jelani C Zarif Journal: Mol Cell Proteomics Date: 2020-07-31 Impact factor: 5.911