Literature DB >> 30262341

Radical Versus Partial Nephrectomy for cT1 Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Boris Gershman1, R Houston Thompson2, Stephen A Boorjian2, Christine M Lohse3, Brian A Costello4, John C Cheville5, Bradley C Leibovich2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Nephron-sparing surgery is the preferred surgical management of cT1 renal masses, but observational and randomized data conflict regarding a survival benefit.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the associations of radical nephrectomy (RN) versus partial nephrectomy (PN) with oncologic and nononcologic outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 2459 adults were treated with RN or PN between 1990 and 2011 for a unilateral, sporadic, cT1, M0 solid renal mass. INTERVENTION: RN or PN. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Associations of the type of nephrectomy with oncologic outcomes (local ipsilateral recurrence, distant metastases, and cancer-specific mortality [CSM]) and nononcologic outcomes (other-cause mortality [OCM], all-cause mortality [ACM], ≥10% decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate [CKD10%], and decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate to <45ml/min/1.73m2 [CKD<45]) were evaluated using several propensity score (PS) techniques. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: After PS adjustment using preoperative features, RN was associated with an increased risk of distant metastases, CSM, ACM, CKD10%, and CKD<45, but not with OCM. However, there remained imbalance in pathologic features. We therefore repeated these analyses in the subset of 1609 patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC). After adjusting for both preoperative and pathologic features, there was no significant difference in the development of distant metastases or CSM. Although RN remained associated with an increased risk of CKD10% (hazard ratio [HR] 2.07-2.21; p<0.001 for each PS technique) and CKD<45 (HR 2.70-2.99; p<0.001 for each PS technique), it was not significantly associated with OCM (HR 1.10-1.17; p=0.08-0.5 for each PS technique) or ACM (HR 1.14-1.15; p=0.2-0.3 for each PS technique, except HR 1.18; p=0.03 by inverse probability weights). Limitations include unmeasured confounding.
CONCLUSIONS: Although RN was associated with an increased risk of chronic kidney disease compared with PN, it was not associated with a statistically significant difference in CSM or ACM among patients with cT1 RCC. PATIENT
SUMMARY: This study suggests that partial nephrectomy is not associated with markedly improved survival compared with radical nephrectomy.
Copyright © 2018 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chronic kidney disease; Partial nephrectomy; Propensity score; Radical nephrectomy; Survival

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30262341     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2018.08.028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  14 in total

1.  The limits of complex partial nephrectomy: are there any?

Authors:  Vignesh T Packiam; R Houston Thompson
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2019-12

2.  Risk reduction in kidney surgery.

Authors:  Martin Marszalek
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2019-07

3.  Prediction of significant estimated glomerular filtration rate decline after renal unit removal to aid in the clinical choice between radical and partial nephrectomy in patients with a renal mass and normal renal function.

Authors:  Andrew G McIntosh; Daniel C Parker; Brian L Egleston; Robert G Uzzo; Mohammed Haseebuddin; Shreyas S Joshi; Rosalia Viterbo; Richard E Greenberg; David Y T Chen; Marc C Smaldone; Alexander Kutikov
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2019-06-30       Impact factor: 5.588

4.  Advantages of organ-sparing treatment approaches in metastatic kidney cancer.

Authors:  Iurii Vitruk; Oleg Voylenko; Oleksandr Stakhovsky; Oleksii Kononenko; Maksym Pikul; Sofiya Semko; Bohdan Hrechko; Denis Koshel; Eduard Stakhovsky
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2022-07-23       Impact factor: 4.322

5.  Human immunodeficiency virus-related renal cell carcinoma: a retrospective study of 19 cases.

Authors:  Mengmeng Zhang; Zhiqiang Zhu; Wenrui Xue; Hui Liu; Yu Zhang
Journal:  Infect Agent Cancer       Date:  2021-04-21       Impact factor: 2.965

6.  Active Surveillance for Risk Stratification of All Small Renal Masses Lacking Predefined Clinical Criteria for Intervention.

Authors:  Arun R Menon; Ahmed A Hussein; Kristopher M Attwood; Tashionna White; Gaybrielle James; Bo Xu; Michael Petroziello; Charles L Roche; Eric C Kauffman
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2021-03-29       Impact factor: 7.600

Review 7.  The role of open radical nephrectomy in contemporary management of renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Arveen A Kalapara; Mark Frydenberg
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2020-12

8.  Impact of Radical Nephrectomy and Partial Nephrectomy on Actual Estimated Overall Survival Compared to Life Expectancy in Patients with Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  Shunta Hori; Nobumichi Tanaka; Kota Iida; Yasushi Nakai; Makito Miyake; Satoshi Anai; Kazumasa Torimoto; Kiyohide Fujimoto
Journal:  Res Rep Urol       Date:  2021-03-24

9.  Emulating Target Clinical Trials of Radical Nephrectomy With or Without Lymph Node Dissection for Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  Janine Bacic; Tao Liu; R Houston Thompson; Stephen A Boorjian; Bradley C Leibovich; Dragan Golijanin; Boris Gershman
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2020-03-04       Impact factor: 2.649

Review 10.  A 25 year perspective on the evolution and advances in an understanding of the biology, evaluation and treatment of kidney cancer.

Authors:  Daniel M Geynisman; Jodi K Maranchie; Mark W Ball; Gennady Bratslavsky; Eric A Singer
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2021-06-04       Impact factor: 2.954

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.