Department of Medical Oncology, Tom Baker Cancer Centre, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada; Department of Urology, University Medicine, Greifswald, Germany; Institute of Urologic Oncology, Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Institute of Urologic Oncology, Department of Urology, David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Eur Urol. 2015 Sep;68(3):506-15. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.11.054. Epub 2014 Dec 15.
It is unknown whether lymph node metastases (LNM) and their localization negatively affect clinical outcome in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients.
To evaluate the clinicopathological features, survival outcome, and treatment response in mRCC patients with LNM versus those without LNM after treatment with targeted therapies (TT).
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients (n=2996) were first analyzed without consideration of lymph node (LN) localization or histologic subtype. Additional analyses (n=1536) were performed in subgroups of patients with supradiaphragmatic (SPD) LNM, subdiaphragmatic (SBD) LNM, and patients with LNM in both locations (SPD+/SBD+) without histologic considerations, and then separately in clear cell RCC (ccRCC) and non-clear cell RCC (nccRCC) patients, respectively.
The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) and the secondary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS).
All patients with LNM had worse PFS (p=0.001) and OS (p<0.001) compared to those without LNM. Compared to patients without LNM (PFS 8.8 mo; OS 25.1 mo), any SBD LNM involvement was associated with worse PFS (SBD, 6.8 mo; p=0.003; SPD+/SBD+, 5.5 mo; p<0.001) and OS (SBD, 16.2 mo; p<0.001; SPD+/SBD+, 11.5 mo; p<0.001). Both SBD and SPD+/SBD+ LNM were retained as independent prognostic factors in multivariate analyses (MVA) for PFS (p=0.006 and p=0.022, respectively) and OS (both p<0.001), while SPD LNM was not an independent risk factor. Likewise, in ccRCC, SBD LNM (19.8 mo) and SPD+/SBD+ LNM (12.85 mo) patients had the worst OS. SPD+/SBD+ LNM (p=0.006) and SBD LNM (p=0.028) were independent prognostic factors for OS in MVA, while SPD LNM was not significant (p=0.301). The study is limited by its retrospective design and the lack of pathologic evaluation of LNM in all cases.
The metastatic spread of RCC to SBD lymph nodes is associated with poor prognosis in mRCC patients treated with TT.
The presence of lymph node metastases below the diaphragm is associated with shorter survival outcome when metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients are treated with targeted therapies. Clinical trials should evaluate whether surgical removal of regional lymph nodes at the time of nephrectomy may improve outcomes in high-risk RCC patients.
尚不清楚肾细胞癌(RCC)转移患者的淋巴结转移(LNM)及其定位是否会对临床结局产生负面影响。
评估转移性肾细胞癌(mRCC)患者接受靶向治疗(TT)后有 LNM 与无 LNM 的临床病理特征、生存结局和治疗反应。
设计、地点和参与者:首先分析了 2996 例患者,未考虑淋巴结(LN)定位或组织学亚型。对亚组患者(n=1536)进行了进一步分析,包括膈上(SPD)LNM、膈下(SBD)LNM 患者,以及 SPD+/SBD+LN 转移患者(无组织学考虑),并分别对透明细胞 RCC(ccRCC)和非透明细胞 RCC(nccRCC)患者进行了分析。
主要结局是总生存期(OS),次要结局是无进展生存期(PFS)。
所有有 LNM 的患者的 PFS(p=0.001)和 OS(p<0.001)均较无 LNM 的患者差。与无 LNM 的患者相比(PFS 8.8 个月;OS 25.1 个月),任何 SBD LNM 累及均与更差的 PFS(SBD,6.8 个月;p=0.003;SPD+/SBD+,5.5 个月;p<0.001)和 OS(SBD,16.2 个月;p<0.001;SPD+/SBD+,11.5 个月;p<0.001)相关。SBD 和 SPD+/SBD+LNM 均为 PFS(p=0.006 和 p=0.022)和 OS(均 p<0.001)多变量分析(MVA)的独立预后因素,而 SPD LNM 不是独立危险因素。同样,在 ccRCC 中,SBD LNM(19.8 个月)和 SPD+/SBD+LNM(12.85 个月)患者的 OS 最差。SPD+/SBD+LNM(p=0.006)和 SBD LNM(p=0.028)是 OS 的独立预后因素,而 SPD LNM 不显著(p=0.301)。该研究受到其回顾性设计和并非所有病例均进行 LNM 病理评估的限制。
RCC 转移至 SBD 淋巴结与 mRCC 患者接受 TT 治疗后的预后不良相关。
转移性肾细胞癌(mRCC)患者接受靶向治疗时,存在膈下淋巴结转移与生存结局较差相关。临床试验应评估在肾切除术时是否可通过手术切除局部淋巴结来改善高危 RCC 患者的预后。