转移性肾细胞癌患者淋巴结转移对预后的影响

IF 1.1 Q4 ONCOLOGY
Kidney Cancer Pub Date : 2021-10-26 DOI:10.3233/kca-210129
H. Eggers, Marie Luise Tiemann, I. Peters, M. Kuczyk, V. Grünwald, P. Ivanyi
{"title":"转移性肾细胞癌患者淋巴结转移对预后的影响","authors":"H. Eggers, Marie Luise Tiemann, I. Peters, M. Kuczyk, V. Grünwald, P. Ivanyi","doi":"10.3233/kca-210129","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND: Lymphnode metastases (LMN) in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has been associated with an unfavourable prognosis. However, the prognostic impact of LNM in mRCC in context of other solid organ metastases and throughout subsequent therapeutic lines is not well-defined. OBJECTIVE: This retrospective single-center analysis was designed to elucidate the impact of LNM in the context of other solid organ metastases and throughout subsequent therapeutic lines. METHODS: mRCC patients (pts) at our center were analysed (observation period, 04/00-03/16). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) and the impact of line of therapy as a co-variate. Pts were grouped into: with LNM [LNM(+)], without LNM [LNN(–)]. Subgroup analyses of LNM(+) was performed including the subgroup LNM(+) and other solid organ metastases [LNM(+) other] and LNM(+) without other solid organ metastases [LMN(+) only]. RESULTS: 383/401 mRCC pts were eligible. 318 (83.2%), 230 (60.1%) and 154 (40.5%) pts received 1stL, 2ndL and 3rdL medical treatment, respectively. In the overall population OS was 40.1 months (95%CI: 32.7–47.4), with superior OS in LNM(–) compared to LNM(+) pts (log rank, HR 1.7, 95%-CI 1.3-2.2, p <  0.001). This effect was maintained across lines of therapies. LNM(+) only had a similar risk of death as LNM(–) pts (HR 1.2, 95%-CI 0.8–2.0, p = 0.4), while the risk of death was significantly increased for LNM(+) other compared to LNM(–) (HR 1.9, 95%-CI 1.5–2.6, p <  0.001). CONCLUSION: LNM(+) in mRCC is associated with a poor OS. However, impaired OS in LNM(+) might be associated with the presence of other solid organ metastases rather than with the existence of LNM alone. Further studies are warranted to support this hypothesis.","PeriodicalId":17823,"journal":{"name":"Kidney Cancer","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prognostic Impact of Lymphnode Metastases in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma\",\"authors\":\"H. Eggers, Marie Luise Tiemann, I. Peters, M. Kuczyk, V. Grünwald, P. Ivanyi\",\"doi\":\"10.3233/kca-210129\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND: Lymphnode metastases (LMN) in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has been associated with an unfavourable prognosis. However, the prognostic impact of LNM in mRCC in context of other solid organ metastases and throughout subsequent therapeutic lines is not well-defined. OBJECTIVE: This retrospective single-center analysis was designed to elucidate the impact of LNM in the context of other solid organ metastases and throughout subsequent therapeutic lines. METHODS: mRCC patients (pts) at our center were analysed (observation period, 04/00-03/16). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) and the impact of line of therapy as a co-variate. Pts were grouped into: with LNM [LNM(+)], without LNM [LNN(–)]. Subgroup analyses of LNM(+) was performed including the subgroup LNM(+) and other solid organ metastases [LNM(+) other] and LNM(+) without other solid organ metastases [LMN(+) only]. RESULTS: 383/401 mRCC pts were eligible. 318 (83.2%), 230 (60.1%) and 154 (40.5%) pts received 1stL, 2ndL and 3rdL medical treatment, respectively. In the overall population OS was 40.1 months (95%CI: 32.7–47.4), with superior OS in LNM(–) compared to LNM(+) pts (log rank, HR 1.7, 95%-CI 1.3-2.2, p <  0.001). This effect was maintained across lines of therapies. LNM(+) only had a similar risk of death as LNM(–) pts (HR 1.2, 95%-CI 0.8–2.0, p = 0.4), while the risk of death was significantly increased for LNM(+) other compared to LNM(–) (HR 1.9, 95%-CI 1.5–2.6, p <  0.001). CONCLUSION: LNM(+) in mRCC is associated with a poor OS. However, impaired OS in LNM(+) might be associated with the presence of other solid organ metastases rather than with the existence of LNM alone. Further studies are warranted to support this hypothesis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":17823,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kidney Cancer\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kidney Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3233/kca-210129\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kidney Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3233/kca-210129","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:转移性肾细胞癌(mRCC)的淋巴结转移(LMN)与不良预后相关。然而,在其他实体器官转移的背景下,LNM对mRCC的预后影响以及随后的治疗方案尚不明确。目的:本回顾性单中心分析旨在阐明LNM在其他实体器官转移和整个后续治疗线中的影响。方法:对我中心mRCC患者(pts)进行分析(观察期:04/00-03/16)。主要终点是总生存期(OS)和作为协变量的治疗方案的影响。患者分为:有LNM [LNM(+)],无LNM [LNN(-)]。对LNM(+)进行亚组分析,包括LNM(+)和其他实体器官转移亚组[LNM(+)其他]和LNM(+)无其他实体器官转移亚组[LMN(+)]。结果:383/401例mRCC患者符合条件。分别有318例(83.2%)、230例(60.1%)和154例(40.5%)患者接受了1级、2级和3级药物治疗。总体生存期为40.1个月(95%CI: 32.7-47.4), LNM(-)患者的生存期优于LNM(+)患者(log rank, HR 1.7, 95%CI 1.3-2.2, p < 0.001)。这种效果在不同的治疗方法中都得到了维持。LNM(+)组的死亡风险与LNM(-)组相似(HR 1.2, 95%-CI 0.8-2.0, p = 0.4),而LNM(+)组的死亡风险明显高于LNM(-)组(HR 1.9, 95%-CI 1.5-2.6, p < 0.001)。结论:mRCC的LNM(+)与不良的OS相关。然而,LNM(+)的OS受损可能与其他实体器官转移的存在有关,而不仅仅是LNM的存在。进一步的研究有理由支持这一假设。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Prognostic Impact of Lymphnode Metastases in Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma
BACKGROUND: Lymphnode metastases (LMN) in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has been associated with an unfavourable prognosis. However, the prognostic impact of LNM in mRCC in context of other solid organ metastases and throughout subsequent therapeutic lines is not well-defined. OBJECTIVE: This retrospective single-center analysis was designed to elucidate the impact of LNM in the context of other solid organ metastases and throughout subsequent therapeutic lines. METHODS: mRCC patients (pts) at our center were analysed (observation period, 04/00-03/16). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) and the impact of line of therapy as a co-variate. Pts were grouped into: with LNM [LNM(+)], without LNM [LNN(–)]. Subgroup analyses of LNM(+) was performed including the subgroup LNM(+) and other solid organ metastases [LNM(+) other] and LNM(+) without other solid organ metastases [LMN(+) only]. RESULTS: 383/401 mRCC pts were eligible. 318 (83.2%), 230 (60.1%) and 154 (40.5%) pts received 1stL, 2ndL and 3rdL medical treatment, respectively. In the overall population OS was 40.1 months (95%CI: 32.7–47.4), with superior OS in LNM(–) compared to LNM(+) pts (log rank, HR 1.7, 95%-CI 1.3-2.2, p <  0.001). This effect was maintained across lines of therapies. LNM(+) only had a similar risk of death as LNM(–) pts (HR 1.2, 95%-CI 0.8–2.0, p = 0.4), while the risk of death was significantly increased for LNM(+) other compared to LNM(–) (HR 1.9, 95%-CI 1.5–2.6, p <  0.001). CONCLUSION: LNM(+) in mRCC is associated with a poor OS. However, impaired OS in LNM(+) might be associated with the presence of other solid organ metastases rather than with the existence of LNM alone. Further studies are warranted to support this hypothesis.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Kidney Cancer
Kidney Cancer Multiple-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
23
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信