Unclassified renal cell carcinoma: Impact on survival following nephrectomy

Paul L. Crispen, Mitra R. Tabidian, Cristine Allmer, Christine M. Lohse, Rodney H. Breau, Michael L. Blute, John C. Cheville, Bradley C. Leibovich

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

14 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: To evaluate the impact of the category of unclassified renal cell carcinoma (URCC) on survival following nephrectomy. Methods: Patients with clear cell RCC (ccRCC, n = 3048) and URCC (n = 38) were identified. Patients with URCC were matched 4:1 with ccRCC patients based on year of surgery, symptoms at presentation, tumor size, stage, regional lymph node involvement, metastases, grade, coagulative tumor necrosis, and sarcomatoid differentiation. Survival was estimated using the KaplanMeier method and compared between ccRCC and URCC patients using log-rank tests. Results: Patients with URCC were more likely to have regional lymph node involvement (P <.001), higher grade (P <.001), tumor necrosis (P <.001), and sarcomatoid differentiation (P <.001) as compared to patients with ccRCC. Overall survival was not significantly different between URCC and ccRCC patients in either the unmatched (P = .337) or matched (P = .345) cohorts. Cancer-specific survival was significantly worse for URCC patients compared with unmatched ccRCC patients (P = .020). However, this difference was not statistically significant when the URCC patients were compared with the matched cohort (P = .688). Distant metastases-free survival was somewhat worse for M0 URCC patients compared with unmatched M0 ccRCC patients (P = .063), but not in the matched cohort (P = .788). Conclusions: Although URCC is more likely to present with advanced clinicopathologic features compared with ccRCC, no statistically significant differences in outcome were noted after adjusting for these features in a matched analysis.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)580-586
Number of pages7
JournalUrology
Volume76
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2010

Fingerprint

Nephrectomy
Renal Cell Carcinoma
Survival
Neoplasms
Necrosis
Lymph Nodes
Neoplasm Metastasis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Crispen, P. L., Tabidian, M. R., Allmer, C., Lohse, C. M., Breau, R. H., Blute, M. L., ... Leibovich, B. C. (2010). Unclassified renal cell carcinoma: Impact on survival following nephrectomy. Urology, 76(3), 580-586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2009.12.037

Unclassified renal cell carcinoma : Impact on survival following nephrectomy. / Crispen, Paul L.; Tabidian, Mitra R.; Allmer, Cristine; Lohse, Christine M.; Breau, Rodney H.; Blute, Michael L.; Cheville, John C.; Leibovich, Bradley C.

In: Urology, Vol. 76, No. 3, 09.2010, p. 580-586.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Crispen, PL, Tabidian, MR, Allmer, C, Lohse, CM, Breau, RH, Blute, ML, Cheville, JC & Leibovich, BC 2010, 'Unclassified renal cell carcinoma: Impact on survival following nephrectomy', Urology, vol. 76, no. 3, pp. 580-586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2009.12.037
Crispen PL, Tabidian MR, Allmer C, Lohse CM, Breau RH, Blute ML et al. Unclassified renal cell carcinoma: Impact on survival following nephrectomy. Urology. 2010 Sep;76(3):580-586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2009.12.037
Crispen, Paul L. ; Tabidian, Mitra R. ; Allmer, Cristine ; Lohse, Christine M. ; Breau, Rodney H. ; Blute, Michael L. ; Cheville, John C. ; Leibovich, Bradley C. / Unclassified renal cell carcinoma : Impact on survival following nephrectomy. In: Urology. 2010 ; Vol. 76, No. 3. pp. 580-586.
@article{21ca1f223e314e2fbfaef654e32e65bf,
title = "Unclassified renal cell carcinoma: Impact on survival following nephrectomy",
abstract = "Objectives: To evaluate the impact of the category of unclassified renal cell carcinoma (URCC) on survival following nephrectomy. Methods: Patients with clear cell RCC (ccRCC, n = 3048) and URCC (n = 38) were identified. Patients with URCC were matched 4:1 with ccRCC patients based on year of surgery, symptoms at presentation, tumor size, stage, regional lymph node involvement, metastases, grade, coagulative tumor necrosis, and sarcomatoid differentiation. Survival was estimated using the KaplanMeier method and compared between ccRCC and URCC patients using log-rank tests. Results: Patients with URCC were more likely to have regional lymph node involvement (P <.001), higher grade (P <.001), tumor necrosis (P <.001), and sarcomatoid differentiation (P <.001) as compared to patients with ccRCC. Overall survival was not significantly different between URCC and ccRCC patients in either the unmatched (P = .337) or matched (P = .345) cohorts. Cancer-specific survival was significantly worse for URCC patients compared with unmatched ccRCC patients (P = .020). However, this difference was not statistically significant when the URCC patients were compared with the matched cohort (P = .688). Distant metastases-free survival was somewhat worse for M0 URCC patients compared with unmatched M0 ccRCC patients (P = .063), but not in the matched cohort (P = .788). Conclusions: Although URCC is more likely to present with advanced clinicopathologic features compared with ccRCC, no statistically significant differences in outcome were noted after adjusting for these features in a matched analysis.",
author = "Crispen, {Paul L.} and Tabidian, {Mitra R.} and Cristine Allmer and Lohse, {Christine M.} and Breau, {Rodney H.} and Blute, {Michael L.} and Cheville, {John C.} and Leibovich, {Bradley C.}",
year = "2010",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1016/j.urology.2009.12.037",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "76",
pages = "580--586",
journal = "Urology",
issn = "0090-4295",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Unclassified renal cell carcinoma

T2 - Impact on survival following nephrectomy

AU - Crispen, Paul L.

AU - Tabidian, Mitra R.

AU - Allmer, Cristine

AU - Lohse, Christine M.

AU - Breau, Rodney H.

AU - Blute, Michael L.

AU - Cheville, John C.

AU - Leibovich, Bradley C.

PY - 2010/9

Y1 - 2010/9

N2 - Objectives: To evaluate the impact of the category of unclassified renal cell carcinoma (URCC) on survival following nephrectomy. Methods: Patients with clear cell RCC (ccRCC, n = 3048) and URCC (n = 38) were identified. Patients with URCC were matched 4:1 with ccRCC patients based on year of surgery, symptoms at presentation, tumor size, stage, regional lymph node involvement, metastases, grade, coagulative tumor necrosis, and sarcomatoid differentiation. Survival was estimated using the KaplanMeier method and compared between ccRCC and URCC patients using log-rank tests. Results: Patients with URCC were more likely to have regional lymph node involvement (P <.001), higher grade (P <.001), tumor necrosis (P <.001), and sarcomatoid differentiation (P <.001) as compared to patients with ccRCC. Overall survival was not significantly different between URCC and ccRCC patients in either the unmatched (P = .337) or matched (P = .345) cohorts. Cancer-specific survival was significantly worse for URCC patients compared with unmatched ccRCC patients (P = .020). However, this difference was not statistically significant when the URCC patients were compared with the matched cohort (P = .688). Distant metastases-free survival was somewhat worse for M0 URCC patients compared with unmatched M0 ccRCC patients (P = .063), but not in the matched cohort (P = .788). Conclusions: Although URCC is more likely to present with advanced clinicopathologic features compared with ccRCC, no statistically significant differences in outcome were noted after adjusting for these features in a matched analysis.

AB - Objectives: To evaluate the impact of the category of unclassified renal cell carcinoma (URCC) on survival following nephrectomy. Methods: Patients with clear cell RCC (ccRCC, n = 3048) and URCC (n = 38) were identified. Patients with URCC were matched 4:1 with ccRCC patients based on year of surgery, symptoms at presentation, tumor size, stage, regional lymph node involvement, metastases, grade, coagulative tumor necrosis, and sarcomatoid differentiation. Survival was estimated using the KaplanMeier method and compared between ccRCC and URCC patients using log-rank tests. Results: Patients with URCC were more likely to have regional lymph node involvement (P <.001), higher grade (P <.001), tumor necrosis (P <.001), and sarcomatoid differentiation (P <.001) as compared to patients with ccRCC. Overall survival was not significantly different between URCC and ccRCC patients in either the unmatched (P = .337) or matched (P = .345) cohorts. Cancer-specific survival was significantly worse for URCC patients compared with unmatched ccRCC patients (P = .020). However, this difference was not statistically significant when the URCC patients were compared with the matched cohort (P = .688). Distant metastases-free survival was somewhat worse for M0 URCC patients compared with unmatched M0 ccRCC patients (P = .063), but not in the matched cohort (P = .788). Conclusions: Although URCC is more likely to present with advanced clinicopathologic features compared with ccRCC, no statistically significant differences in outcome were noted after adjusting for these features in a matched analysis.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84755161352&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84755161352&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.urology.2009.12.037

DO - 10.1016/j.urology.2009.12.037

M3 - Article

C2 - 20223503

AN - SCOPUS:84755161352

VL - 76

SP - 580

EP - 586

JO - Urology

JF - Urology

SN - 0090-4295

IS - 3

ER -