Literature DB >> 28951284

Growth Kinetics of Small Renal Masses on Active Surveillance: Variability and Results from the DISSRM Registry.

Akachimere C Uzosike1, Hiten D Patel2, Ridwan Alam1, Zeyad R Schwen1, Mohit Gupta1, Michael A Gorin1, Michael H Johnson1, Heather Gausepohl1, Mark F Riffon1, Bruce J Trock1, Peter Chang1, Andrew A Wagner1, James M McKiernan1, Mohamad E Allaf1, Phillip M Pierorazio1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Active surveillance is emerging as a safe and effective strategy for the management of small renal masses (4 cm or less). We characterized the growth rate and its pertinence to clinical outcomes in a prospective multi-institutional study of patients with small renal masses.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Since 2009, the DISSRM (Delayed Intervention and Surveillance for Small Renal Masses) prospective, multi-institutional registry of patients with small renal masses has enrolled patients who elect primary intervention or active surveillance. Patients who elect active surveillance received regularly scheduled imaging and those with 3 or more followup images were included in the current study to evaluate growth rates.
RESULTS: We evaluated 318 patients who elected active surveillance, of whom 271 (85.2%) had 3 or more followup images available with a median imaging followup of 1.83 years. The overall mean ± SD small renal mass growth rate was 0.09 ± 1.51 cm per year (median 0.09) with no variables demonstrating statistically significant associations. The growth rate and variability decreased with longer followup (0.54 and 0.07 cm per year at less than 6 months and greater than 1 year, respectively). No patients had metastatic disease or died of kidney cancer. No statistically significant difference was noted in the growth rate in patients with biopsy demonstrated renal cell carcinoma or in those who died.
CONCLUSIONS: Small renal mass growth kinetics are highly variable early on active surveillance with growth rates and variability decreasing with time. Early in active surveillance, especially during the initial 6 to 12 months, the growth rate is variable and does not reliably predict death or adverse pathological features in the patient subset with available pathology findings. An elevated growth rate may indicate the need for further assessment with imaging or consideration of biopsy prior to progressing to treatment. Additional followup will inform the best clinical pathway for elevated growth rates.
Copyright © 2018 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  diagnostic imaging; kidney neoplasms; mortality; prognosis; watchful waiting

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28951284     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2017.09.087

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  20 in total

Review 1.  Imaging Protocols for Active Surveillance in Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  Christine W Liaw; Jared S Winoker; Reza Mehrazin
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2018-08-13       Impact factor: 3.092

2.  [Watchful waiting and active surveillance of small renal masses].

Authors:  R Mager; S Frees; A Haferkamp
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 0.639

3.  Safety and delayed intervention rates of active surveillance for small renal masses in an elderly population.

Authors:  Brian T Kadow; Marc C Smaldone
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2019-09

Review 4.  Harnessing the Genomic Landscape of the Small Renal Mass to Guide Clinical Management.

Authors:  Andrew W Silagy; Alejandro Sanchez; Brandon J Manley; Karim Bensalah; Axel Bex; Jose A Karam; Börje Ljungberg; Brian Shuch; A Ari Hakimi
Journal:  Eur Urol Focus       Date:  2019-04-28

5.  Growth rates and outcomes of observed large renal masses.

Authors:  Naji J Touma; Gregory W Hosier; Michael A Di Lena; Robert J Leslie; Louisa Ho; Alexandre Menard; D Robert Siemens
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2018-12-03       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 6.  Bosniak Classification of Cystic Renal Masses, Version 2019: An Update Proposal and Needs Assessment.

Authors:  Stuart G Silverman; Ivan Pedrosa; James H Ellis; Nicole M Hindman; Nicola Schieda; Andrew D Smith; Erick M Remer; Atul B Shinagare; Nicole E Curci; Steven S Raman; Shane A Wells; Samuel D Kaffenberger; Zhen J Wang; Hersh Chandarana; Matthew S Davenport
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2019-06-18       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  A particle filter approach to dynamic kidney pose estimation in robotic surgical exposure.

Authors:  Michael A Kokko; Douglas W Van Citters; John D Seigne; Ryan J Halter
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2022-05-05       Impact factor: 2.924

8.  Comparative effectiveness of management options for patients with small renal masses: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Ridwan Alam; Hiten D Patel; Tijani Osumah; Arnav Srivastava; Michael A Gorin; Michael H Johnson; Bruce J Trock; Peter Chang; Andrew A Wagner; James M McKiernan; Mohamad E Allaf; Phillip M Pierorazio
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2018-08-09       Impact factor: 5.588

Review 9.  Current Management of Small Renal Masses, Including Patient Selection, Renal Tumor Biopsy, Active Surveillance, and Thermal Ablation.

Authors:  Alejandro Sanchez; Adam S Feldman; A Ari Hakimi
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2018-10-29       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Available active surveillance follow-up protocols for small renal mass: a systematic review.

Authors:  Giacomo Rebez; Nicola Pavan; M Carmen Mir
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-01-16       Impact factor: 4.226

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.