We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
The Clinicopathological Features and Prognosis in Patients With Papillary Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Multicenter Retrospective Study in Chinese Population.
- Authors
Hong, Baoan; Hou, Huimin; Chen, Lingxiao; Li, Zhi; Zhang, Zhipeng; Zhao, Qiang; Du, Xin; Li, Yuan; Ye, Xiongjun; Xu, Wanhai; Liu, Ming; Zhang, Ning
- Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinicopathological characteristics of type 1 and type 2 papillary renal cell carcinoma (PRCC) and to explore the prognostic factors of PRCC in the Chinese population. Methods: A total of 242 patients with PRCC from five Chinese medical centers were retrospectively included. From them, 82 were type 1 PRCC and 160 were type 2 PRCC. Clinicopathological features and oncologic outcomes were reviewed. The Kaplan–Meier analysis and log-rank test were performed to describe the progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to analyze the prognostic factors of PRCC. Results: Of the 242 patients, the average age at surgery was 55.3 ± 13.1 years. The mean tumor size was 5.1 ± 3.1 cm. Compared with type 1 PRCC patients, type 2 PRCC patients had a larger tumor size and were more likely to undergo radical nephrectomy. Besides, type 2 PRCC patients had higher tumor stage (p < 0.001) and WHO International Society of Urological Pathology (WHO/ISUP) grading (p < 0.001). Furthermore, tumor necrosis was more common in type 2 PRCC than type 1 PRCC (p = 0.030). The Kaplan–Meier survival analysis showed that the PFS and OS of type 1 PRCC patients were significantly better than those of type 2 PRCC patients (p = 0.0032 and p = 0.0385, respectively). Univariate analysis showed that tumor size, surgical procedures, pT stage, WHO/ISUP grading, and microvascular invasion were significant predictors of PFS and OS for type 2 PRCC patients. In the multivariate analysis, only pT stage (p = 0.004) and WHO/ISUP grading (p = 0.010) were the independent risk factors. Among type 2 PRCC patients with pT1 stage, no significant difference was found in PFS and OS between the partial nephrectomy and radical nephrectomy groups (p = 0.159 and p = 0.239, respectively). Conclusion: This multi-institutional study reveals the significant differences in clinicopathological variables and oncologic outcomes between type 1 and 2 PRCC. For type 2 PRCC in pT1 stage, the prognosis of partial nephrectomy is not inferior to that of radical nephrectomy, and nephron-sparing surgery can be considered.
- Subjects
RENAL cell carcinoma; CHINESE people; OVERALL survival; PROPORTIONAL hazards models; PROGNOSIS; OPERATIVE surgery
- Publication
Frontiers in Oncology, 2021, Vol 11, p1
- ISSN
2234-943X
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.3389/fonc.2021.753690