Nityam Rathi1, Diego A Palacios1, Emily Abramczyk1, Hajime Tanaka1,2, Yunlin Ye1,3, Jianbo Li4, Yosuke Yasuda1,2, Robert Abouassaly1, Mohamed Eltemamy1, Alvin Wee1, Christopher Weight1, Steven C Campbell5. 1. Center for Urologic Oncology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Room Q10-120, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA. 2. Department of Urology, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan. 3. Department of Urology, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangzhou, China. 4. Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. 5. Center for Urologic Oncology, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Room Q10-120, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA. campbes3@ccf.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate a conceptually simple model to predict new-baseline-glomerular-filtration-rate (NBGFR) after radical nephrectomy (RN) based on split-renal-function (SRF) and renal-functional-compensation (RFC), and to compare its predictive accuracy against a validated non-SRF-based model. RN should only be considered when the tumor has increased oncologic potential and/or when there is concern about perioperative morbidity with PN due to increased tumor complexity. In these circumstances, accurate prediction of NBGFR after RN can be important, with a threshold NBGFR > 45 ml/min/1.73m2 correlating with improved overall survival. METHODS: 236 RCC patients who underwent RN (2010-2012) with preoperative imaging (CT/MRI) and relevant functional data were included. NBGFR was defined as GFR 3-12 months post-RN. SRF was determined using semi-automated software that provides differential parenchymal-volume-analysis (PVA) from preoperative imaging. Our SRF-based model was: Predicted NBGFR = 1.24 (× Global GFRPre-RN) (× SRFContralateral), with 1.24 representing the mean RFC estimate from independent analyses. A non-SRF-based model was also assessed: Predicted NBGFR = 17 + preoperative GFR (× 0.65)-age (× 0.25) + 3 (if tumor > 7 cm)-2 (if diabetes). Alignment between predicted/observed NBGFR was assessed by comparing correlation coefficients and area-under-the-curve (AUC) analyses. RESULTS: The correlation-coefficients (r) were 0.87/0.72 for SRF-based/non-SRF-based models, respectively (p = 0.005). For prediction of NBGFR > 45 ml/min/1.73m2, the SRF-based/non-SRF-based models provided AUC of 0.94/0.87, respectively (p = 0.044). CONCLUSION: Previous non-SRF-based models to predict NBGFR post-RN are complex and omit two important parameters: SRF and RFC. Our proposed model prioritizes these parameters and provides a conceptually simple, accurate, and clinically implementable approach to predict NBGFR post-RN. SRF can be easily obtained using PVA software that is affordable, readily available (FUJIFILM-Medical-Systems), and more accurate than nuclear-renal-scans. The SRF-based model demonstrates greater predictive-accuracy than a non-SRF-based model, including the clinically-important predictive-threshold of NBGFR > 45 ml/min/1.73m2.
PURPOSE: To evaluate a conceptually simple model to predict new-baseline-glomerular-filtration-rate (NBGFR) after radical nephrectomy (RN) based on split-renal-function (SRF) and renal-functional-compensation (RFC), and to compare its predictive accuracy against a validated non-SRF-based model. RN should only be considered when the tumor has increased oncologic potential and/or when there is concern about perioperative morbidity with PN due to increased tumor complexity. In these circumstances, accurate prediction of NBGFR after RN can be important, with a threshold NBGFR > 45 ml/min/1.73m2 correlating with improved overall survival. METHODS: 236 RCC patients who underwent RN (2010-2012) with preoperative imaging (CT/MRI) and relevant functional data were included. NBGFR was defined as GFR 3-12 months post-RN. SRF was determined using semi-automated software that provides differential parenchymal-volume-analysis (PVA) from preoperative imaging. Our SRF-based model was: Predicted NBGFR = 1.24 (× Global GFRPre-RN) (× SRFContralateral), with 1.24 representing the mean RFC estimate from independent analyses. A non-SRF-based model was also assessed: Predicted NBGFR = 17 + preoperative GFR (× 0.65)-age (× 0.25) + 3 (if tumor > 7 cm)-2 (if diabetes). Alignment between predicted/observed NBGFR was assessed by comparing correlation coefficients and area-under-the-curve (AUC) analyses. RESULTS: The correlation-coefficients (r) were 0.87/0.72 for SRF-based/non-SRF-based models, respectively (p = 0.005). For prediction of NBGFR > 45 ml/min/1.73m2, the SRF-based/non-SRF-based models provided AUC of 0.94/0.87, respectively (p = 0.044). CONCLUSION: Previous non-SRF-based models to predict NBGFR post-RN are complex and omit two important parameters: SRF and RFC. Our proposed model prioritizes these parameters and provides a conceptually simple, accurate, and clinically implementable approach to predict NBGFR post-RN. SRF can be easily obtained using PVA software that is affordable, readily available (FUJIFILM-Medical-Systems), and more accurate than nuclear-renal-scans. The SRF-based model demonstrates greater predictive-accuracy than a non-SRF-based model, including the clinically-important predictive-threshold of NBGFR > 45 ml/min/1.73m2.
Authors: Maximiliano Sorbellini; Michael W Kattan; Mark E Snyder; A Ari Hakimi; Debra M Sarasohn; Paul Russo Journal: J Urol Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Jitao Wu; Chalairat Suk-Ouichai; Wen Dong; Elvis Caraballo Antonio; Ithaar H Derweesh; Brian R Lane; Sevag Demirjian; Jianbo Li; Steven C Campbell Journal: BJU Int Date: 2017-09-10 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Emil Scosyrev; Edward M Messing; Richard Sylvester; Steven Campbell; Hendrik Van Poppel Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2013-07-02 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Brian R Lane; Sevag Demirjian; Ithaar H Derweesh; Toshio Takagi; Zhiling Zhang; Lily Velet; Cesar E Ercole; Amr F Fergany; Steven C Campbell Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2015-05-23 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Sevag Demirjian; Brian R Lane; Ithaar H Derweesh; Toshio Takagi; Amr Fergany; Steven C Campbell Journal: J Urol Date: 2014-04-18 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Hyung L Kim; Satyan K Shah; Wei Tan; Sergey A Shikanov; Kevin C Zorn; Arieh L Shalhav; Gregory E Wilding Journal: J Urol Date: 2009-04-16 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Steven C Campbell; Peter E Clark; Sam S Chang; Jose A Karam; Lesley Souter; Robert G Uzzo Journal: J Urol Date: 2021-06-11 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Nityam Rathi; Yosuke Yasuda; Worapat Attawettayanon; Diego A Palacios; Yunlin Ye; Jianbo Li; Christopher Weight; Mohammed Eltemamy; Tarik Benidir; Robert Abouassaly; Steven C Campbell Journal: Int Urol Nephrol Date: 2022-07-17 Impact factor: 2.266
Authors: Nityam Rathi; Yosuke Yasuda; Diego Aguilar Palacios; Worapat Attawettayanon; Jianbo Li; Bimal Bhindi; R Houston Thompson; Michael A Liss; Ithaar H Derweesh; Christopher J Weight; Mohammed Eltemamy; Robert Abouassaly; Steven C Campbell Journal: Eur Urol Open Sci Date: 2022-05-05