Potential benefit of lymph node dissection during radical nephrectomy for kidney cancer: A review and critical analysis of current literature

Renal cell cancer treatment: the Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group (LACOG) and the Latin American Renal Cancer Group (LARCG) surgery-focused consensus update

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) represents 2.2% of all malignancies worldwide; however, its mortality rate is not negligible. Surgery is the primary treatment for most nonadvanced cases, with its indications and techniques evolving over the years. To provide an update on RCC management in Brazil, focusing on surgery. The Latin American Cooperative Oncology Group-Genitourinary Section and the Latin American Renal Cancer Group gathered a panel of Brazilian urologists and clinical oncologists to vote on and discuss the best management of surgically resectable RCC. The experts compared the results with the literature and graded them according to the level of evidence. For small renal masses (SRMs; less than 4 cm), biopsy is indicated for specific/select cases, and when intervention is needed, partial nephrectomy should be prioritized. Radical nephrectomy and ablative techniques are exceptions for managing SRMs. Patients with small tumors (less than 3 cm), slow tumor growth, or a risk for surgery may benefit from active surveillance. Localized carcinoma up to 7 cm in diameter should be treated preferably with partial nephrectomy. Lymphadenectomy and adrenalectomy should be performed in locally advanced cases if involvement is suspected by imaging exams. Patients with venous tumor thrombi usually require surgical intervention depending on the extent of the thrombus. Neoadjuvant therapy should be considered for unresectable cases. Even in the era of targeted therapy, cytoreductive nephrectomy still has a role in metastatic disease. Metastasectomy is indicated for most patients with resectable disease. This consensus presents recommendations for surgical treatment of RCC based on expert opinions and evidence from the medical literature. Surgery remains the best curative option for nonadvanced cases, and it still has a role for select patients with metastatic disease.

The prognostic role of histomorphological subtyping in nonmetastatic papillary renal cell carcinoma after curative surgery: is subtype really irrelevant? A propensity score matching analysis of a multi-institutional real life data

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The role of histomorphological subtyping is an issue of debate in papillary renal cell carcinoma (papRCC). This multi-institutional study investigated the prognostic role of histomorphological subtyping in patients undergoing curative surgery for nonmetastatic papRCC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 1,086 patients undergoing curative surgery were included from a retrospectively collected multi-institutional nonmetastatic papRCC database. The patients were divided into 2 groups based on histomorphological subtyping (type 1, n = 669 and type 2, n = 417). Furthermore, a propensity score-matching (PSM) cohort in 1:1 ratio (n = 317 for each subtype) was created to reduce the effect of potential confounding variables. The primary outcome of the study, the predictive role of histomorphological subtyping on the prognosis (recurrence free survival [RFS], cancer specific survival [CSS] and overall survival [OS]) in nonmetastatic papRCC after curative surgery, was investigated in both overall and PSM cohorts.

RESULTS

In overall cohort, type 2 group were older (66 vs. 63 years, P = 0.015) and more frequently underwent radical nephrectomy (37.4% vs. 25.6%, P < 0.001) and lymphadenectomy (22.3% vs. 15.1%, P = 0.003). Tumor size (4.5 vs. 3.8 cm, P < 0.001) was greater, and nuclear grade (P < 0.001), pT stage (P < 0.001), pN stage (P < 0.001), VENUSS score (P < 0.001) and VENUSS high risk (P < 0.001) were significantly higher in type 2 group. 5-year RFS (89.6% vs. 74.2%, P < 0.001), CSS (93.9% vs. 84.2%, P < 0.001) and OS (88.5% vs. 78.5%, P < 0.001) were significantly lower in type 2 group. On multivariable analyses, type 2 was a significant predictor for RFS (HR:1.86 [95%CI:1.33-2.61], P < 0.001) and CSS (HR:1.91 [95%CI:1.20-3.04], P = 0.006), but not for OS (HR:1.27 [95%CI:0.92-1.76], P = 0.150). In PSM cohort balanced with age, gender, symptoms at diagnosis, pT and pN stages, tumor grade, surgical margin status, sarcomatoid features, rhabdoid features, and presence of necrosis, type 2 increased recurrence risk (HR:1.75 [95%CI: 1.16-2.65]; P = 0.008), but not cancer specific mortality (HR: 1.57 [95%CI: 0.91-2.68]; P = 0.102) and overall mortality (HR: 1.01 [95%CI: 0.68-1.48]; P = 0.981) CONCLUSIONS: This multiinstitutional study suggested that type 2 was associated with adverse histopathologic outcomes, and predictor of RFS and CSS after surgical treatment of nonmetastatic papRCC, in overall cohort. In propensity score-matching cohort, type 2 remained the predictor of RFS. Eventhough 5th WHO classification for renal tumors eliminated histomorphological subtyping, these findings suggest that subtyping is relevant from the point of prognostic view.

Mining and validation of prognosis of various visceral metastasis in renal cell carcinoma: a study based on SEER database

Our study was aimed to analyze a substantial of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients, research the high-risk factors and prognostic factors of metastasis, and thoroughly examine the effects of primary site surgery, lymph node dissection (LND), and chemotherapy on the prognosis of different visceral metastases. The baseline characteristics were characterized, and logistic regression was used to predict the risk factors for metastasis. Prognostic factors of metastatic RCC were assessed using batch univariate and multivariate Cox regression, with adjustments made through PSM. Next, the Kaplan-Meier method was employed to assess OS and create the survival curve. Logistic regression identified risk factors for metastasis: male gender [OR, 1.223; P < 0.001], Hist clear (OR, 9.37; P < 0.001), Hist papillary (OR, 2.49; P < 0.001), and TTX (OR, 23.33; P < 0.001). We found several independent prognostic variables: among which chemotherapy (HR, 0.64), local LND (HR, 0.67), and primary site surgery (HR, 0.97) were associated with better OS. Further study results demonstrated that all kinds of visceral metastasis except for liver metastasis in the operation group had substantially better prognoses than those in the non-operation group (P < 0.05). Regional LND had no discernible impact on survival. Patients with liver, lung, and distant lymph node (LN) metastasis benefited from chemotherapy (P < 0.05), but the bone and brain metastasis did not significantly benefit from treatment (P > 0.05). We recommend primary surgery for different types of visceral metastases except liver metastasis. Routine regional LND is not recommended. Chemotherapy should be considered for patients with lung, distant LN, and liver metastases, but not for those with bone and brain metastases.

Prognostic Significance of Pathologic Lymph Node Invasion in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in the Immunotherapy Era

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to test the prognostic significance of pathologically confirmed lymph node invasion in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients in this immunotherapy era.

METHODS

Surgically treated mRCC patients were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between 2010 and 2018. Kaplan-Meier plots and multivariable Cox-regression models were fitted to test for differences in cancer-specific mortality (CSM) and overall mortality (OM) according to N stage (pN0 vs pN1 vs. pNx). Subgroup analyses addressing pN1 patients tested for CSM and OM differences according to postoperative systemic therapy status.

RESULTS

Overall, 3149 surgically treated mRCC patients were identified. Of these patients, 443 (14%) were labeled as pN1, 812 (26%) as pN0, and 1894 (60%) as pNx. In Kaplan-Meier analyses, the median CSM-free survival was 15 months for pN1 versus 40 months for pN0 versus 35 months for pNx (P < 0.001). In multivariable Cox regression analyses, pN1 independently predicted higher CSM (hazard ratio [HR], 1.88; P < 0.01) and OM (HR, 1.95; P < 0.01) relative to pN0. In sensitivity analyses addressing pN1 patients, postoperative systemic therapy use independently predicted lower CSM (HR, 0.73; P < 0.01) and OM (HR, 0.71; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Pathologically confirmed lymph node invasion independently predicted higher CSM and OM for surgically treated mRCC patients. For pN1 mRCC patients, use of postoperative systemic therapy was associated with lower CSM and OM. Consequently, N stage should be considered for individual patient counseling and clinical decision-making. Consort diagram of the study population.

Role of lymphadenectomy during primary surgery for kidney cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Lymph node dissection (LND) during radical nephrectomy (RN) for renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is not considered as a standard. The emergence of robot-assisted surgery and effective immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) in recent years may change this and lymph node (LN) staging has become easier and has a clinical impact. In this review, we aimed to reconsider the role of LND today.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although the extent of LND has still not been well established, removal of more LN seems to provide better oncologic outcomes for a select group of patients with high-risk factors such as clinical T3-4. Adjuvant therapy using pembrolizumab has been shown to improve disease free survival if complete resection of metastatic lesions as well as the primary site is obtained in combination. Robot assisted RN for localized RCC has been widespread and the studies regarding LND for RCC has been recently appeared.

SUMMARY

The staging and surgical benefits and its extent of LND during RN for RCC remains unclear, but it is becoming increasingly important. Technologies that allow an easier LND and adjuvant ICI that improve survival in LN-positive patients are engaging the role of LND, a procedure that was needed, but almost never done, is now indicated sometimes. Now, the goal is to identify the clinical and molecular imaging tools that can help identify with sufficient accuracy who needs a LND and which LNs to remove in a targeted personalized approach.