Dataset Information

Comparison of prognosis between patients undergoing radical nephrectomy versus partial nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma ≤7 cm T3aN0/xM0: Survival benefit is biased toward partial nephrectomy.

ABSTRACT:

Background

There is limited and controversial evidence on the prognosis of partial nephrectomy (PN) versus radical nephrectomy (RN) in patients with T3aN0/xM0 renal cell carcinoma (RCC) upstaged from clinical T1 RCC. In this study, we aimed to assess the prognosis difference following PN versus RN in patients with ≤7 cm T3aN0/xM0 RCC.

Methods

From the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database, a total of 3196 patients receiving treatment of PN/RN for ≤7 cm T3aN0/xM0 RCC with only extrarenal fat extension in 2010-2017 were identified. An inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)-adjusted cause-specific Cox model with hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) was used for overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) analyses. Sensitivity analysis was based on the propensity score matching of PN and RN groups and from the dataset of 2010-2013.

Results

A total of 872 patients underwent PN, compared with 2324 undergoing RN. After IPTW adjustment, there was no significant difference in preoperative baseline characteristics between the PN and RN cohorts. Patients who underwent RN had worse OS (HR_{IPTW-adjusted} , 1.46; 95% CI, 1.16-1.84; p = 0.001) and comparable CSS (HR_{IPTW-adjusted} , 1.03; 95% CI, 0.64-1.66; p = 0.890) than those receiving PN in all cohorts and subgroups with T3a RCC of ≤4 cm and perinephric fat extension. Further, in patients with 4-7 cm T3a RCC with perinephric-fat invasion and all sizes of T3a RCC with sinus/perisinus fat extension, PN led to comparable OS and CSS. Sensitivity analyses validated these results.

Conclusion

PN provides comparable CSS and OS or even better OS than RN for patients with RCC ≤7 cm T3aN0/xM0. Although our study has some limitations, our results indicated that PN might oncologically safe for clinical T1 RCC, even confirmed a pathologically T3a upstaging post-PN.

SUBMITTER: Liu S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8683550 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPartial nephrectomy and radical nephrectomy are the relevant surgical therapy options for localised renal cell carcinoma. However, debate regarding the effects of these surgical approaches continues and it is important to identify and summarise high-quality studies to make surgical treatment recommendations.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of partial nephrectomy compared with radical nephrectomy for clinically localised renal cell carcinoma.Search methodsWe searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, BIOSIS, LILACS, Scopus, two trial registries and abstracts from three major conferences to 24 February 2017, together with reference lists; and contacted selected experts in the field.Selection criteriaWe included a randomised controlled trial comparing partial and radical nephrectomy for participants with small renal masses.Data collection and analysisOne review author screened all of the titles and abstracts; only citations that were clearly irrelevant were excluded at this stage. Next, two review authors independently assessed full-text reports, identified relevant studies, evaluated the eligibility of the studies for inclusion, assessed trial quality and extracted data. The update of the literature search was performed by two independent review authors. We used Review Manager 5 for data synthesis and data analyses.Main resultsWe identified one randomised controlled trial including 541 participants that compared partial nephrectomy to radical nephrectomy. The median follow-up was 9.3 years.Based on low quality evidence, we found that time-to-death of any cause was decreased using partial nephrectomy (HR 1.50, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.18). This corresponds to 79 more deaths (5 more to 173 more) per 1000. Also based on low quality evidence, we found no difference in serious adverse events (RR 2.04, 95% CI 0.19 to 22.34). Findings are consistent with 4 more surgery-related deaths (3 fewer to 78 more) per 1000.Based on low quality evidence, we found no difference in time-to-recurrence (HR 1.37, 95% CI 0.58 to 3.24). This corresponds to 12 more recurrences (14 fewer to 70 more) per 1000. Due to the nature of reporting, we were unable to analyse overall rates for immediate and long-term adverse events. We found no evidence on haemodialysis or quality of life.Reasons for downgrading related to study limitations (lack of blinding, cross-over), imprecision and indirectness (a substantial proportion of patients were ultimately found not to have a malignant tumour). Based on the finding of a single trial, we were unable to conduct any subgroup or sensitivity analyses.Authors' conclusionsPartial nephrectomy may be associated with a decreased time-to-death of any cause. With regards to surgery-related mortality, cancer-specific survival and time-to-recurrence, partial nephrectomy appears to result in little to no difference.