Yasmin Abu-Ghanem1, Thomas Powles2, Umberto Capitanio3, Christian Beisland4, Petrus Järvinen5, Grant D Stewart6, Eiríkur Orri Gudmundsson7, Thomas B Lam8, Lorenzo Marconi9, Sergio Fernandéz-Pello10, Harry Nisen5, Richard P Meijer11, Alessandro Volpe12, Börje Ljungberg13, Tobias Klatte14, Saeed Dabestani15, Axel Bex16. 1. Centre for Kidney Cancer, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, UCL Division of Surgical and Interventional Science, London, UK. Electronic address: y.abu-ghanem@nhs.net. 2. Barts Cancer Institute, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK. 3. Division of Experimental Oncology, Urological Research Institute (URI), IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy. 4. Department of Urology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway. 5. Abdominal Center, Urology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland. 6. Department of Surgery, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. 7. Department of Urology, Landspitali University Hospital, Reykjavik, Iceland. 8. Academic Urology Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK. 9. Department of Urology, Coimbra University Hospital, Coimbra, Portugal. 10. Department of Urology, Cabueñes University Hospital, Gijón, Spain. 11. Department of Oncological Urology, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 12. Department of Urology, University of Eastern Piedmont, Maggiore della Carità Hospital, Novara, Italy. 13. Department of Surgical and Perioperative Sciences, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden. 14. Department of Surgery, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK; Department of Urology, Royal Bournemouth and Christchurch Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Bournemouth, UK. 15. Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Skane University Hospital, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. 16. Centre for Kidney Cancer, Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, UCL Division of Surgical and Interventional Science, London, UK; Department of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Current follow-up strategies for patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) after curative surgery rely mainly on risk models and the treatment delivered, regardless of the histological subtype. OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of RCC histological subtype on recurrence and to examine the incidence, pattern, and timing of recurrences to improve follow-up recommendations. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This study included consecutive patients treated surgically with curative intention (ie, radical and partial nephrectomy) for nonmetastatic RCC (cT1-4, M0) between January 2006 and December 2011 across 15 centres from 10 countries, as part of the euRopEan association of urology renal cell carcinoma guidelines panel Collaborative multicenter consortium for the studies of follow-Up and recurrence patterns in Radically treated renal cell carcinoma patients (RECUR) database project. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The impact of histological subtype (ie, clear cell RCC [ccRCC], papillary RCC [pRCC], and chromophobe RCC [chRCC]) on recurrence-free survival (RFS) was assessed via univariate and multivariate analyses, adjusting for potential interactions with important variables (stage, grade, risk score, etc.) Patterns of recurrence for all histological subtypes were compared according to recurrence site and risk criteria. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of the 3331 patients, 62.2% underwent radical nephrectomy and 37.8% partial nephrectomy. A total of 2565 patients (77.0%) had ccRCC, 535 (16.1%) had pRCC, and 231 (6.9%) had chRCC. The median postoperative follow-up period was 61.7 (interquartile range: 47-83) mo. Patients with ccRCC had significantly poorer 5-yr RFS than patients with pRCC and chRCC (78% vs 86% vs 91%, p = 0.001). The most common sites of recurrence for ccRCC were the lung and bone. Intermediate-/high-risk pRCC patients had an increased rate of lymphatic recurrence, both mediastinal and retroperitoneal, while recurrence in chRCC was rare (8.2%), associated with higher stage and positive margins, and predominantly in the liver and bone. Limitations include the retrospective nature of the study. CONCLUSIONS: The main histological subtypes of RCC exhibit a distinct pattern and dynamics of recurrence. Results suggest that intermediate- to high-risk pRCC may benefit from cross-sectional abdominal imaging every 6 mo until 2 yr after surgery, while routine imaging might be abandoned for chRCC except for abdominal computed tomography in patients with advanced tumour stage or positive margins. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this analysis of a large database from 15 countries around Europe, we found that the main histological subtypes of renal cell carcinoma have a distinct pattern and dynamics of recurrence. Patients should be followed differently according to subtype and risk score.
BACKGROUND: Current follow-up strategies for patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) after curative surgery rely mainly on risk models and the treatment delivered, regardless of the histological subtype. OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of RCC histological subtype on recurrence and to examine the incidence, pattern, and timing of recurrences to improve follow-up recommendations. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This study included consecutive patients treated surgically with curative intention (ie, radical and partial nephrectomy) for nonmetastatic RCC (cT1-4, M0) between January 2006 and December 2011 across 15 centres from 10 countries, as part of the euRopEan association of urology renal cell carcinoma guidelines panel Collaborative multicenter consortium for the studies of follow-Up and recurrence patterns in Radically treated renal cell carcinoma patients (RECUR) database project. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The impact of histological subtype (ie, clear cell RCC [ccRCC], papillary RCC [pRCC], and chromophobe RCC [chRCC]) on recurrence-free survival (RFS) was assessed via univariate and multivariate analyses, adjusting for potential interactions with important variables (stage, grade, risk score, etc.) Patterns of recurrence for all histological subtypes were compared according to recurrence site and risk criteria. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Of the 3331 patients, 62.2% underwent radical nephrectomy and 37.8% partial nephrectomy. A total of 2565 patients (77.0%) had ccRCC, 535 (16.1%) had pRCC, and 231 (6.9%) had chRCC. The median postoperative follow-up period was 61.7 (interquartile range: 47-83) mo. Patients with ccRCC had significantly poorer 5-yr RFS than patients with pRCC and chRCC (78% vs 86% vs 91%, p = 0.001). The most common sites of recurrence for ccRCC were the lung and bone. Intermediate-/high-risk pRCC patients had an increased rate of lymphatic recurrence, both mediastinal and retroperitoneal, while recurrence in chRCC was rare (8.2%), associated with higher stage and positive margins, and predominantly in the liver and bone. Limitations include the retrospective nature of the study. CONCLUSIONS: The main histological subtypes of RCC exhibit a distinct pattern and dynamics of recurrence. Results suggest that intermediate- to high-risk pRCC may benefit from cross-sectional abdominal imaging every 6 mo until 2 yr after surgery, while routine imaging might be abandoned for chRCC except for abdominal computed tomography in patients with advanced tumour stage or positive margins. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this analysis of a large database from 15 countries around Europe, we found that the main histological subtypes of renal cell carcinoma have a distinct pattern and dynamics of recurrence. Patients should be followed differently according to subtype and risk score.
Authors: Maria I Carlo; Kyrollis Attalla; Yousef Mazaheri; Sounak Gupta; Onur Yildirim; Samuel J Murray; Devyn T Coskey; Ritesh Kotecha; Chung-Han Lee; Darren R Feldman; Paul Russo; Sujata Patil; Robert J Motzer; Jonathan A Coleman; Jeremy C Durack; Ying-Bei Chen; Oguz Akin; A Ari Hakimi; Martin H Voss Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2022-02-17 Impact factor: 24.267
Authors: Nicholas H Chakiryan; Da David Jiang; Kyle A Gillis; Elizabeth Green; Ali Hajiran; Lee Hugar; Logan Zemp; Jingsong Zhang; Rohit K Jain; Jad Chahoud; Philippe E Spiess; Wade Sexton; Scott M Gilbert; Brandon J Manley Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-05-03
Authors: Frederik Wessels; Max Schmitt; Eva Krieghoff-Henning; Jakob N Kather; Malin Nientiedt; Maximilian C Kriegmair; Thomas S Worst; Manuel Neuberger; Matthias Steeg; Zoran V Popovic; Timo Gaiser; Christof von Kalle; Jochen S Utikal; Stefan Fröhling; Maurice S Michel; Philipp Nuhn; Titus J Brinker Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-08-17 Impact factor: 3.752