Journals / Üroonkoloji Bülteni / 2019 / Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 3

Analysis of Prognostic Factors Affecting Cancer-specific Survival in Renal Tumors Larger than Ten Centimeters

Pages
99–106
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: Although tumor size is an important prognostic factor for T2b and lower stage kidney tumors, this effect is less in larger tumors and other clinicopathological features should be considered further to predict prognosis.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between prognostic factors and cancer-specific survival (CSS) in renal tumors larger than ten centimeters.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: We evaluated the data of 126 patients who underwent open radical nephrectomy due to a renal mass larger than 10 cm between January 2010 and June 2016.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: Although tumor size is an important prognostic factor for T2b and lower stage kidney tumors, this effect is less in larger tumors and other clinicopathological features should be considered further to predict prognosis.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2010 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between prognostic factors and cancer-specific survival (CSS) in renal tumors larger than ten centimeters. Materials and Methods: We evaluated the data of 126 patients who underwent open radical nephrectomy due to a renal mass larger than 10 cm between January 2010 and June 2016. Kaplan-Meier analysis or Cox regression was used to analyze the relationship between CSS and variables. Pairwise group comparisons were also evaluated with the Log-Rank test. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Mean follow-up was 68.5 months and mean survival was 39.2 months. The relationships between tumor histopathology, stage and CSS were significant. Tumor size negatively affected CSS, but the relationship was not significant. Tumor stage (T2b, T3b), tumor thrombus, lymph node metastasis and adjuvant therapy were the most effective independent factors affecting CSS according to Cox regression analysis results. Conclusion: Although tumor size is an important prognostic factor for T2b and lower stage kidney tumors, this effect is less in larger tumors and other clinicopathological features should be considered further to predict prognosis.

🔖

Cite This Article

KIZILAY, F., ŞİMŞİR, A., AKINCIOĞLU, E., KALEMCİ, S., ÇAL, Ç., CÜREKLİBATIR, İ., ŞEN, S., KUMBARACI, B. S. (2019). Analysis of Prognostic Factors Affecting Cancer-specific Survival in Renal Tumors Larger than Ten Centimeters. Üroonkoloji Bülteni, Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 3, 99–106. https://ajindex.com/articles/334879

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Siesling S, Louwman WJ, Kwast A, et al. Uses of cancer registries for public health and clinical research in Europe: Results of the European Network of Cancer Registries survey among 161 population-based cancer registries during 2010-2012. Eur J Cancer 2015;51:1039-1049
  2. McGuire S. World cancer report 2014. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, international agency for research on cancer, WHO Press, 2015. Adv Nutr 2016;7:418-419
  3. Waalkes S, Becker F, Schrader AJ, et al. Is there a need to further subclassify pT2 renal cell cancers as implemented by the revised 7th TNM version? Eur Urol 2011;59:258-263
  4. Bianchi M, Becker A, Trinh QD, et al. An analysis of patients with T2 renal cell carcinoma (RCC) according to tumour size: a populationbased analysis. BJU Int 2013;111:1184-1190
  5. Varkarakis IM, Allaf ME, Inagaki T, et al. Percutaneous radio frequency ablation of renal masses: results at a 2-year mean followup. J Urol 2005;174:456-460
  6. Zisman A, Pantuck AJ, Dorey F, et al. Improved prognostication of renal cell carcinoma using an integrated staging system. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:1649-1657
  7. Motzer RJ, Mazumdar M, Bacik J, et al. Survival and prognostic stratification of 670 patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 1999;17:2530-2540
  8. Gospodarowicz MK, Brierley JD, Wittekind C. TNM classification of malignant tumours. John Wiley Sons; 2017
  9. Kunkle DA, Crispen PL, Li T, Uzzo RG. Tumor size predicts synchronous metastatic renal cell carcinoma: implications for surveillance of small renal masses. J Urol 2007;177:1692-1696
  10. Guinan P, Saffrin R, Stuhldreher D, et al. Renal cell carcinoma: comparison of the TNM and Robson stage groupings. J Surg Oncol 1995;59:186-189
  11. Fuhrman SA, Lasky LC, Limas C. Prognostic significance of morphologic parameters in renal cell carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 1982;6:655-663
  12. Amin MB, Paner GP, Alvarado-Cabrero I, et al. Chromophobe renal cell carcinoma: histomorphologic characteristics and evaluation of conventional pathologic prognostic parameters in 145 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 2008;32:1822-1834
  13. Kopp RP, Mehrazin R, Palazzi KL, et al. Survival outcomes after radical and partial nephrectomy for clinical T2 renal tumours categorised by R.E.N.A.L nephrometry score. BJU Int 2014;114:708-718
  14. Laird A, Choy K, Delaney H, et al. Matched pair analysis of laparoscopic versus open radical nephrectomy for the treatment of T3 renal cell carcinoma. World J Urol 2015;33:25-32. 15