PURPOSE: To determine the therapeutic value of lymph node dissection (LND) during cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) and assess predictors of cancer-specific survival (CSS) in metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified 293 consecutive patients treated with CN at 4 academic institutions from March 2000 to May 2015. LND was performed in 187 patients (63.8%). CSS was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method for the entire cohort and for a propensity score-matched cohort. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate CSS in a multivariate model and in an inverse probability weighting-adjusted model for patients who underwent dissection. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 12.6 months (interquartile range, 4.47, 30.3), and median survival was 15.9 months. Of the 293 patients, 187 (63.8%) underwent LND. One hundred six patients had nodal involvement (pN+) with a median CSS of 11.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.6, 15.9) versus 24.2 months (95% confidence interval, 14.1, 34.3) for pN- patients (log-rank P = .002). The hazard ratio for LND was 1.325 (95% CI, 1.002, 1.75) for the whole cohort and 1.024 (95% CI, 0.682, 1.537) in the propensity score-matched cohort. Multivariate analysis revealed that number of positive lymph nodes (P < .001) was a significant predictor of worse CSS. CONCLUSION: For patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma undergoing CN with lymphadenectomy, the number of nodes positive was predictive of survival at short-term follow-up. However, nonstandardized lymphadenectomy only provided prognostic information without therapeutic benefit. Prospective studies with standardized templates are required to further ascertain the therapeutic value of LND.
PURPOSE: To determine the therapeutic value of lymph node dissection (LND) during cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) and assess predictors of cancer-specific survival (CSS) in metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified 293 consecutive patients treated with CN at 4 academic institutions from March 2000 to May 2015. LND was performed in 187 patients (63.8%). CSS was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method for the entire cohort and for a propensity score-matched cohort. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate CSS in a multivariate model and in an inverse probability weighting-adjusted model for patients who underwent dissection. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 12.6 months (interquartile range, 4.47, 30.3), and median survival was 15.9 months. Of the 293 patients, 187 (63.8%) underwent LND. One hundred six patients had nodal involvement (pN+) with a median CSS of 11.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.6, 15.9) versus 24.2 months (95% confidence interval, 14.1, 34.3) for pN- patients (log-rank P = .002). The hazard ratio for LND was 1.325 (95% CI, 1.002, 1.75) for the whole cohort and 1.024 (95% CI, 0.682, 1.537) in the propensity score-matched cohort. Multivariate analysis revealed that number of positive lymph nodes (P < .001) was a significant predictor of worse CSS. CONCLUSION: For patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma undergoing CN with lymphadenectomy, the number of nodes positive was predictive of survival at short-term follow-up. However, nonstandardized lymphadenectomy only provided prognostic information without therapeutic benefit. Prospective studies with standardized templates are required to further ascertain the therapeutic value of LND.
Authors: Hiten D Patel; Michael A Gorin; Natasha Gupta; Max Kates; Michael H Johnson; Phillip M Pierorazio; Mohamad E Allaf Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2016 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: Harras B Zaid; William P Parker; Nida S Safdar; Boris Gershman; Patricia J Erwin; M Hassan Murad; Stephen A Boorjian; Brian A Costello; R Houston Thompson; Bradley C Leibovich Journal: J Urol Date: 2016-07-26 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Umberto Capitanio; Claudio Jeldres; Jean-Jacques Patard; Paul Perrotte; Laurent Zini; Alexandre de La Taille; Vincenzo Ficarra; Luca Cindolo; Karim Bensalah; Walter Artibani; Jacques Tostain; Antoine Valeri; Richard Zigeuner; Arnaud Méjean; Jean Luc Descotes; Eric Lechevallier; Peter F Mulders; Herve Lang; Didier Jacqmin; Pierre I Karakiewicz Journal: BJU Int Date: 2008-10-16 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Robert J Motzer; Jennifer Bacik; Lawrence H Schwartz; Victor Reuter; Paul Russo; Stephanie Marion; Madhu Mazumdar Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-02-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Quoc-Dien Trinh; Shyam Sukumar; Jan Schmitges; Marco Bianchi; Maxine Sun; Shahrokh F Shariat; Jesse D Sammon; Claudio Jeldres; Kevin C Zorn; Paul Perrotte; Markus Graefen; Craig G Rogers; James O Peabody; Mani Menon; Pierre I Karakiewicz Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2012-12-23 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Kiran Gupta; Jeffrey D Miller; Jim Z Li; Mason W Russell; Claudie Charbonneau Journal: Cancer Treat Rev Date: 2008-03-04 Impact factor: 12.111
Authors: Ross J Mason; Lori Wood; Anil Kapoor; Naveen Basappa; George Bjarnason; Stephen A Boorjian; Rodney H Breau; Ilias Cagiannos; Michael A S Jewett; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Wassim Kassouf; Christian Kollmannsberger; Aly-Khan A Lalani; Jean-Baptiste Lattouf; Luke T Lavallée; Stephen Pautler; Nicholas Power; Patrick Richard; Alan So; Simon Tanguay; Ricardo A Rendon Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 1.862