Wei Zhuang1, Jiabi Chen1, Yining Li1, Weihui Liu2. 1. Department of Urology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Zhongshan North Road, Licheng District, Quanzhou, 362000, Fujian, China. 2. Department of Urology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Zhongshan North Road, Licheng District, Quanzhou, 362000, Fujian, China. liuweihui0422@163.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Attempt to group the number of lymph nodes in a more ideal way to assess the value of lymph node dissection (LND) in the treatment of localized high-risk renal cell cancer (LH-RCC). METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Result database (SEER) was used to analyze LH-RCC patients who undergoing radical nephrectomy (RN) from 2011 to 2015. The X-tile software was performed to calculate the optimal grouping cut-off points for the number of removed lymph nodes and positive lymph nodes. The Nomogram model was constructed by R language to visually present survival rates of patients. RESULTS: Among 4917 cases of LH-RCC patients undergoing RN, there were 1835 patients treated with LND (37.32%) with the average survival time (AST) of 43.10 months (95% CI 41.91-44.29), which was superior than 40.52 months of patients who did not have LND (95% CI 39.26-41.78) (P < 0.01). The mortality risk of patients with ≥ 3 removed nodes was 0.75 times that of patients with 1-2 removed nodes (95% CI 0.62-0.99, P < 0.01). For overall survival (OS), the hazard ratio of ≥ 5 positive nodes, 1-4 positive nodes, and 0 positive node was 3.04, 2.37, and 1.00, respectively. The Nomogram model can evaluate the 1 year, 2 year, and 3 year survival rates of LH-RCC patients undergoing RN with the internal validation C-index of 0.73. CONCLUSION: LH-RCC patients with ≥ 3 removed lymph nodes and fewer positive lymph nodes are expected to have better long-term survival. LND is not only helpful for tumor staging of LH-RCC, but also valuable for long-term survival.
PURPOSE: Attempt to group the number of lymph nodes in a more ideal way to assess the value of lymph node dissection (LND) in the treatment of localized high-risk renal cell cancer (LH-RCC). METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Result database (SEER) was used to analyze LH-RCCpatients who undergoing radical nephrectomy (RN) from 2011 to 2015. The X-tile software was performed to calculate the optimal grouping cut-off points for the number of removed lymph nodes and positive lymph nodes. The Nomogram model was constructed by R language to visually present survival rates of patients. RESULTS: Among 4917 cases of LH-RCCpatients undergoing RN, there were 1835 patients treated with LND (37.32%) with the average survival time (AST) of 43.10 months (95% CI 41.91-44.29), which was superior than 40.52 months of patients who did not have LND (95% CI 39.26-41.78) (P < 0.01). The mortality risk of patients with ≥ 3 removed nodes was 0.75 times that of patients with 1-2 removed nodes (95% CI 0.62-0.99, P < 0.01). For overall survival (OS), the hazard ratio of ≥ 5 positive nodes, 1-4 positive nodes, and 0 positive node was 3.04, 2.37, and 1.00, respectively. The Nomogram model can evaluate the 1 year, 2 year, and 3 year survival rates of LH-RCCpatients undergoing RN with the internal validation C-index of 0.73. CONCLUSION: LH-RCCpatients with ≥ 3 removed lymph nodes and fewer positive lymph nodes are expected to have better long-term survival. LND is not only helpful for tumor staging of LH-RCC, but also valuable for long-term survival.
Authors: Kara N Babaian; Dae Y Kim; Patrick A Kenney; Christopher G Wood; Joseph Wong; Christopher Sanchez; Justin E Fang; Jonathan A Gerber; Adin Didic; Adelani Wahab; Vishnukamal Golla; Cristina Torres; Pheroze Tamboli; Wei Qiao; Surena F Matin; Christopher G Wood; Jose A Karam Journal: J Urol Date: 2014-10-25 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Umberto Capitanio; Nazareno Suardi; Rayan Matloob; Marco Roscigno; Firas Abdollah; Ettore Di Trapani; Marco Moschini; Andrea Gallina; Andrea Salonia; Alberto Briganti; Francesco Montorsi; Roberto Bertini Journal: BJU Int Date: 2014-05-22 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Paolo Dell'Oglio; Alessandro Larcher; Fabio Muttin; Ettore Di Trapani; Francesco Trevisani; Francesco Ripa; Cristina Carenzi; Alberto Briganti; Andrea Salonia; Francesco Montorsi; Roberto Bertini; Umberto Capitanio Journal: Urol Oncol Date: 2017-08-08 Impact factor: 3.498
Authors: Boris Gershman; Daniel M Moreira; R Houston Thompson; Stephen A Boorjian; Christine M Lohse; Brian A Costello; John C Cheville; Bradley C Leibovich Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2017-01-13 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Benjamin T Ristau; Judi Manola; Naomi B Haas; Daniel Y C Heng; Edward M Messing; Christopher G Wood; Christopher J Kane; Robert S DiPaola; Robert G Uzzo Journal: J Urol Date: 2017-07-18 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: Jan H M Blom; Hein van Poppel; Jean M Maréchal; Didier Jacqmin; Fritz H Schröder; Linda de Prijck; Richard Sylvester Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2008-10-01 Impact factor: 20.096