Iurii Vitruk1, Oleg Voylenko1, Oleksandr Stakhovsky1, Oleksii Kononenko1, Maksym Pikul2, Sofiya Semko1, Bohdan Hrechko1, Denis Koshel1, Eduard Stakhovsky1. 1. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Oncological Urology, National Cancer Institute of the Ministry of Health of Ukraine, 33/43 Lomonosova Str, Kiev, 03022, Ukraine. 2. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Oncological Urology, National Cancer Institute of the Ministry of Health of Ukraine, 33/43 Lomonosova Str, Kiev, 03022, Ukraine. urogenetics@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study analyzed oncological outcomes of patients with metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) treated with cytoreductive partial nephrectomy or nephrectomy. METHODS: This prospective non-randomized cohort study included 109 patients with metastatic ccRCC who underwent surgical treatment between 2011 and 2020. Patients were stratified into cytoreductive partial nephrectomy or nephrectomy groups. Survival curves were estimated, and Cox-regression analysis was performed to identify factors affecting potential lethality. RESULTS: The groups differed significantly in terms of T stage and International metastatic RCC database consortium (IMDC) risk groups, but not international society of urological pathology (ISUP) grading. The average blood loss volume was higher in the partial nephrectomy group. In contrast, the duration of post-operative stay, complication rate; and 30-day hospital readmission rate were similar between two groups. There was a significant difference in overall survival in favor of the partial nephrectomy group, who had better 7-year survival rates. Standardization based on the clinical complexity of the patients showed that cytoreductive partial nephrectomy was associated with a lower risk of death compared to nephrectomy. CONCLUSION: Partial nephrectomy is a safe method of choice in patients with metastatic ccRCC. Kidney preservation in a metastatic setting can play a role in reducing potential adverse systemic therapy events and in decreasing the risk for concomitant pathology deterioration.
PURPOSE: This study analyzed oncological outcomes of patients with metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) treated with cytoreductive partial nephrectomy or nephrectomy. METHODS: This prospective non-randomized cohort study included 109 patients with metastatic ccRCC who underwent surgical treatment between 2011 and 2020. Patients were stratified into cytoreductive partial nephrectomy or nephrectomy groups. Survival curves were estimated, and Cox-regression analysis was performed to identify factors affecting potential lethality. RESULTS: The groups differed significantly in terms of T stage and International metastatic RCC database consortium (IMDC) risk groups, but not international society of urological pathology (ISUP) grading. The average blood loss volume was higher in the partial nephrectomy group. In contrast, the duration of post-operative stay, complication rate; and 30-day hospital readmission rate were similar between two groups. There was a significant difference in overall survival in favor of the partial nephrectomy group, who had better 7-year survival rates. Standardization based on the clinical complexity of the patients showed that cytoreductive partial nephrectomy was associated with a lower risk of death compared to nephrectomy. CONCLUSION: Partial nephrectomy is a safe method of choice in patients with metastatic ccRCC. Kidney preservation in a metastatic setting can play a role in reducing potential adverse systemic therapy events and in decreasing the risk for concomitant pathology deterioration.
Authors: Juan Barbastefano; Jorge A Garcia; Paul Elson; Laura S Wood; Brian R Lane; Robert Dreicer; Steven C Campbell; Brian I Rini Journal: BJU Int Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Bimal Bhindi; E Jason Abel; Laurence Albiges; Karim Bensalah; Stephen A Boorjian; Siamak Daneshmand; Jose A Karam; Ross J Mason; Thomas Powles; Axel Bex Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2018-10-25 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Saskia de Groot; William K Redekop; Stefan Sleijfer; Egbert Oosterwijk; Axel Bex; Lambertus A L M Kiemeney; Carin A Uyl-de Groot Journal: Urology Date: 2016-05-11 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Michael R Abern; Emelian Scosyrev; Matvey Tsivian; Edward M Messing; Thomas J Polascik; Arkadiusz Z Dudek Journal: Anticancer Res Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 2.480
Authors: Roderick de Bruijn; Akhila Wimalasingham; Bernadett Szabados; Grant D Stewart; Sarah J Welsh; Teele Kuusk; Christian Blank; John Haanen; Tobias Klatte; Michael Staehler; Thomas Powles; Axel Bex Journal: Eur Urol Oncol Date: 2020-01-16
Authors: Axel Bex; Peter Mulders; Michael Jewett; John Wagstaff; Johannes V van Thienen; Christian U Blank; Roland van Velthoven; Maria Del Pilar Laguna; Lori Wood; Harm H E van Melick; Maureen J Aarts; J B Lattouf; Thomas Powles; Igle Jan de Jong Md PhD; Sylvie Rottey; Bertrand Tombal; Sandrine Marreaud; Sandra Collette; Laurence Collette; John Haanen Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Toni K Choueiri; Thomas Powles; Mauricio Burotto; Bernard Escudier; Maria T Bourlon; Bogdan Zurawski; Victor M Oyervides Juárez; James J Hsieh; Umberto Basso; Amishi Y Shah; Cristina Suárez; Alketa Hamzaj; Jeffrey C Goh; Carlos Barrios; Martin Richardet; Camillo Porta; Rubén Kowalyszyn; Juan P Feregrino; Jakub Żołnierek; David Pook; Elizabeth R Kessler; Yoshihiko Tomita; Ryuichi Mizuno; Jens Bedke; Joshua Zhang; Matthew A Maurer; Burcin Simsek; Flavia Ejzykowicz; Gisela M Schwab; Andrea B Apolo; Robert J Motzer Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2021-03-04 Impact factor: 91.245