Search

MARC‐2, a prospective, multicenter phase IV trial, aimed to investigate clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with everolimus after failure of one initial vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (VEGFR‐TKI) therapy and to identify subgroups benefiting most, based on clinical characteristics and biomarkers. Patients with clear cell mRCC failing one initial VEGFR‐TKI received everolimus until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was 6‐month progression‐free survival rate (6moPFS). Secondary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR), PFS, overall survival (OS), and safety. Between 2011 and 2015, 63 patients were enrolled. Median age was 65.4 years (range 43.3‐81.1). 6moPFS was 39.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 27.0‐51.3) overall, 54.4% (95% CI, 35.2‐70.1) vs 23.7% (95% CI, 10.5‐39.9) for patients aged ≥65 vs 25 vs ≤25 kg/m2. A Cox proportional hazards model confirmed a longer PFS for patients aged ≥65 years (hazard ratio [HR] 0.46; 95% CI, 0.26‐0.80) and a longer OS for patients with BMI >25 kg/m2 (HR 0.36; 95% CI, 0.18‐0.71). Median PFS and median OS were 3.8 months (95% CI, 3.2‐6.2) and 16.8 months (95% CI, 14.3‐24.3). ORR was 7.9% and disease control rate was 60.3%. No new safety signals emerged. Most common adverse events were stomatitis (31.7%), fatigue (31.7%), and anemia (30.2%). One patient died from treatment‐related upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Everolimus remains a safe and effective treatment option for mRCC patients after one prior VEGFR‐TKI therapy. Patients aged ≥65 years and patients with BMI >25 kg/m2 benefited most.

Purpose To describe the results of a polyethylene glycol-coated collagen patch, Hemopatch® on blood loss, surgical time and renal function in partial nephrectomy (PN) for renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Methods Out of a single surgeon cohort of n = 565 patients undergoing conventional open PN (CPN) between 01/2015 and 12/2017 at the University of Munich a consecutive subgroup (n = 42) was operated on using a polyethylene glycol-coated collagen-based sealant Hemopatch® (Baxter International Inc., Deerfield, IL, USA) (HPN). Results Median age was 65.2 years (range 12.7–95.2) with median follow-up of 9.43 months (0.03–49.15). Baseline renal function (CKD-EPI) was 78.56 ml/min/1.73 m2 (range 20.38–143.09) with a non-significant decline to 74.78 ml/min/1.73 m2 (range 3.75–167.74) at follow-up. In CPN 46% had low complexity, 33% moderate complexity and 20% high complexity lesions with 33% low, 40% moderate and 27% high complexity masses in HPN. Median tumor size was 4.3 cm (range 1–38 cm) in CPN with 4.8 cm (range 3.8–18.3 cm) with HPN, p = 0.293. Median blood loss and duration of surgery was significantly lower in the HPN group vs. CPN (146 ml ± 195 vs. 114 ml ± 159 ml; p = 0.021; 43 min ± 27 for HPN vs. 53 min ± 49; p = 0.035) with no difference in clamping time (12.6 min ± 8.6 for HPN vs. 12.0 min ± 9.5; p = 0.701). Conclusions Hemopatch® supported renoraphy shows promising results compared to standard renoraphy in PN. No side effects were seen. Further studies should evaluate the prevention of arterio-venous or urinary fistulas. In complex partial nephrectomies Hemopatch® supported renoraphy should be considered.

Background: There are limited data on the use and concern of telemedicine among German urologists, and thus, there are no established guidelines for telemedical diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of urological indications. Methods: An anonymized survey was conducted among German private practice urologists during the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. The χ2 test, Mann-Whitney U-test, and Kruskal-Wallis test were used for statistical analysis. Results: 257 urologists were included in the final analysis. Thirty-five (14.0%) of urologists had used telemedicine as part of their consultation, and 221 (86.0%) had not used telemedicine. There was no difference between telemedicine adoption rates between rural and urban settings. Telemedicine users were significantly more satisfied with the information they had received regarding telemedicine issues. Users saw the greatest barrier to telemedicine that patients do not take up the offer of telemedicine. Nonusers were most concerned with unclear indications for telemedicine followed by lesser reimbursements during telemedicine than in-person visitations. Users were significantly more likely to use telemedicine beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. Urologists, who wanted to use the service in the future, wanted an active support by the German society of urology and guidelines for telemedicine. Last, users and nonusers preferred telemedicine for non-acute chronic diseases and follow-up visitations. Conclusion: Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine remains a rarely used service among German private practice urologists. Ultimately, to overcome the current challenges, urologists require an active support for the service through the German Society of Urology and telemedical guidelines.

Introduction Tyrosine kinase (TKI) and checkpoint inhibitors (CI) prolonged overall survival in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Early prediction of treatment response is highly desirable for the individualization of patient management and improvement of therapeutic outcome; however, serum biochemistry is unable to predict therapeutic efficacy. Therefore, we compared 18F-PSMA-1007 PET imaging for response assessment in mRCC patients undergoing TKI or CI therapy compared to CT-based response assessment as the current imaging reference standard. Methods 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT was performed in mRCC patients prior to initiation of systemic treatment and 8 weeks after therapy initiation. Treatment response was evaluated separately on 18F-PSMA-PET and CT. Changes on PSMA-PET (SUVmean) were assessed on a per patient basis using a modified PERCIST scoring system. Complete response (CRPET) was defined as absence of any uptake in all target lesions on posttreatment PET. Partial response (PRPET) was defined as decrease in summed SUVmean of > 30%. The appearance of new, PET-positive lesions or an increase in summed SUVmean of > 30% was defined as progressive disease (PDPET). A change in summed SUVmean of ± 30% defined stable disease (SDPET). RECIST 1.1 criteria were used for response assessment on CT. Results of radiographic response assessment on PSMA-PET and CT were compared. Results Overall, 11 mRCC patients undergoing systemic treatment were included. At baseline PSMA-PET1, all mRCC patients showed at least one PSMA-avid lesion. On follow-up PET2, 3 patients showed CRPET, 3 PRPET, 4 SDPET, and 1 PDPET. According to RECIST 1.1, 1 patient showed PRCT, 9 SDCT, and 1 PDCT. Overall, concordant classifications were found in only 2 cases (2 SDCT + PET). Patients with CRPET on PET were classified as 3 SDCT on CT using RECIST 1.1. By contrast, the patient classified as PRCT on CT showed PSMA uptake without major changes during therapy (SDPET). However, among 9 patients with SDCT on CT, 3 were classified as CRPET, 3 as PRPET, 1 as PDPET, and only 2 as SDPET on PSMA-PET. Conclusion On PSMA-PET, heterogeneous courses were observed during systemic treatment in mRCC patients with highly diverging results compared to RECIST 1.1. In the light of missing biomarkers for early response assessment, PSMA-PET might allow more precise response assessment to systemic treatment, especially in patients classified as SD on CT.

Patients with larger (T1b,4 cm) renal cell carcinoma (RCC) not suitable for surgery have few treatment options because thermal ablation is less effective in this setting. We hypothesize that SABR represents an effective, safe, and nephron-sparing alternative for large RCC.Individual patient data from 9 institutions in Germany, Australia, USA, Canada, and Japan were pooled. Patients with T1a tumors, M1 disease, and/or upper tract urothelial carcinoma were excluded. Demographics, treatment, oncologic, and renal function outcomes were assessed using descriptive statistics. Kaplan-Meier estimates and univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression were generated for oncologic outcomes.Ninety-five patients were included. Median follow-up was 2.7 years. Median age was 76 years, median tumor diameter was 4.9 cm, and 81.1% had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 1 (or Karnofsky performance status ≥70%). In patients for whom operability details were reported, 77.6% were defined as inoperable as determined by the referring urologist. Mean baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was 57.2 mL/min (mild-to-moderate dysfunction), with 30% of the cohort having moderate-to-severe dysfunction (eGFR45mL/min). After SABR, eGFR decreased by 7.9 mL/min. Three patients (3.2%) required dialysis. Thirty-eight patients (40%) had a grade 1 to 2 toxicity. No grade 3 to 5 toxicities were reported. Cancer-specific survival, overall survival, and progression-free survival were 96.1%, 83.7%, and 81.0% at 2 years and 91.4%, 69.2%, 64.9% at 4 years, respectively. Local, distant, and any failure at 4 years were 2.9%, 11.1%, and 12.1% (cumulative incidence function with death as competing event). On multivariable analysis, increasing tumor size was associated with inferior cancer-specific survival (hazard ratio per 1 cm increase: 1.30; P .001).SABR for larger RCC in this older, largely medically inoperable cohort, demonstrated efficacy and tolerability and had modest impact on renal function. SABR appears to be a viable treatment option in this patient population.

PURPOSE: Patients with cancer commonly report distress and fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) impacting quality of life and clinical outcomes. This study aims to test the association between emotional well-being and clinical characteristics of survivors with localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Survivors with localized RCC were invited to participate in this study through social media by the Kidney Cancer Research Alliance. Participants self-reported clinical characteristics, distress (Distress Thermometer), and FCR (Fear of Cancer Recurrence-7). Ordinal regression was used to test the association between emotional well-being and patient characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 412 survivors were included in this analysis. Participants were mostly female (79.4%) and well educated (58.3%), with a median age of 54 years (range, 30-80 years) and median time since diagnosis of 17.5 months. More than one half were diagnosed with stage I disease (56.1%). Most patients (62.3%) had a clear understanding of their diagnosis. A high prevalence of moderate to severe distress (67.0%) and FCR (54.9%) was reported across all survivors of RCC. Higher FCR was associated with female gender, younger age, and lack of understanding of their diagnosis ( P = .001), whereas more recent diagnosis was associated with higher distress levels ( P = .01). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that FCR is a common problem that is persistent after therapy and that certain individuals, including female and younger patients, may be at particular risk of experiencing clinically relevant FCR.

The European Association of Urology (EAU) Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) Guideline Panel performed a protocol-driven systematic review (SR) on thermal ablation (TA) compared with partial nephrectomy (PN) for T1N0M0 renal masses, in order to provide evidence to support its recommendations. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed, and only comparative studies published between 2000 and 2019 were included. Twenty-six nonrandomised comparative studies were included, recruiting a total of 167 80 patients. Risk of bias (RoB) assessment revealed high or uncertain RoB across all studies, with the vast majority being retrospective, observational studies with poorly matched controls and short follow-up. Limited data showed TA to be safe, but its long-term oncological effectiveness compared with PN remains uncertain. A quality assessment of pre-existing SRs (n=11) on the topic, using AMSTAR, revealed that all SRs had low confidence rating, with all but two SRs being rated critically low. In conclusion, the current data are inadequate to make any strong and clear conclusions regarding the clinical effectiveness of TA for treating T1N0M0 renal masses compared with PN. Therefore, TA may be cautiously considered an alternative to PN for T1N0M0 renal masses, but patients must be counselled carefully regarding the prevailing uncertainties. We recommend specific steps to improve the evidence base based on robust primary and secondary studies. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, we looked at the literature to determine the effectiveness of thermoablation (TA) in the treatment of small kidney tumours compared with surgical removal. We found that TA could cautiously be offered as an option due to many remaining uncertainties regarding its effectiveness.

Non‐clear cell renal cell carcinoma is a very rare malignancy that includes several histological subtypes. Each subtype may need to be addressed separately regarding prognosis and treatment; however, no Phase III clinical trial data exist. Thus, treatment recommendations for patients with non‐clear cell metastatic RCC (mRCC) remain unclear. We present first prospective data on choice of first‐ and second‐line treatment in routine practice and outcome of patients with papillary mRCC. From the prospective German clinical cohort study (RCC‐Registry), 99 patients with papillary mRCC treated with systemic first‐line therapy between December 2007 and May 2017 were included. Prospectively enrolled patients who had started first‐line treatment until May 15, 2016, were included into the outcome analyses (n = 82). Treatment was similar to therapies used for clear cell mRCC and consisted of tyrosine kinase inhibitors, mechanistic target of rapamycin inhibitors and recently checkpoint inhibitors. Median progression‐free survival from start of first‐line treatment was 5.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.1–9.2) and median overall survival was 12.0 months (95% CI, 8.1–20.0). At data cutoff, 73% of the patients died, 6% were still observed, 12% were lost to follow‐up, and 9% were alive at the end of the individual 3‐year observation period. Despite the lack of prospective Phase III evidence in patients with papillary mRCC, our real‐world data reveal effectiveness of systemic clear cell mRCC therapy in papillary mRCC. The prognosis seems to be inferior for papillary compared to clear cell mRCC. Further studies are needed to identify drivers of effectiveness of systemic therapy for papillary mRCC., What's new? Over the past decade, the treatment landscape for locally advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) has dramatically changed. To date, however, guideline recommendations mainly address patients with clear cell mRCC, due to a lack of prospective Phase III evidence for the rarer, non‐clear cell mRCC subtypes. This is the first longitudinal, prospective cohort study evaluating treatment and survival of patients with papillary mRCC outside a prospective clinical trial setting. The presented real‐world data help bridge the evidence gap by revealing the frequent use and effectiveness of systemic clear cell mRCC therapy in papillary mRCC, with a seemingly inferior prognosis.

Various imaging methods have been evaluated regarding non-invasive differentiation of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) subtypes. Dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) allows iodine concentration (IC) analysis as a correlate of tissue perfusion. Microvascular density (MVD) in histopathology specimens is evaluated to determine intratumoral vascularization. The objective of this study was to assess the potential of IC and MVD regarding the differentiation between papillary and clear cell RCC and between well- and dedifferentiated tumors. Further, we aimed to investigate a possible correlation between these parameters. DECT imaging series of 53 patients with clear cell RCC (ccRCC) and 15 with papillary RCC (pRCC) were analyzed regarding IC. Histology samples were stained using CD31/CD34 monoclonal antibodies; MVD was evaluated digitally. Statistical analysis included performance of Mann-Whitney U test, ROC analysis, and Spearman rank correlation. Analysis of IC demonstrated significant differences between ccRCC and pRCC (p

To systematically assessed the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) compared to other imaging modalities for diagnosing and staging renal-cell carcinoma in adults.A comprehensive literature search was conducted through various electronic databases. Data from the selected studies were extracted and pooled, and median sensitivity and specificity were calculated wherever possible. Forty studies analyzing data of 4354 patients were included. They examined CT, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), positron emission tomography-CT, and ultrasound (US).For CT, median sensitivity and specificity were 88% (interquartile range [IQR] 81%-94%) and 75% (IQR 51%-90%), and for MRI they were 87.5% (IQR 75.25%-100%) and 89% (IQR 75%-96%). Staging sensitivity and specificity for CT were 87% and 74.5%, while MRI showed a median sensitivity of 90% and specificity of 75%. For US, the results varied greatly depending on the corresponding technique. Contrast-enhanced US had a median diagnostic sensitivity of 93% (IQR 88.75%-98.25%) combined with mediocre specificity. The diagnostic performance of unenhanced US was poor. For positron emission tomography-CT, diagnostic accuracy values were good but were based on only a small amount of data. Limitations include the strong heterogeneity of data due to the large variety in imaging techniques and tumor histotypes. Contrast-enhanced CT and MRI remain the diagnostic mainstay for renal-cell carcinoma, with almost equally high diagnostic and staging accuracy.For specific questions, a combination of different imaging techniques such as CT or MRI and contrast-enhanced US may be useful. There is a need for future large prospective studies to further increase the quality of evidence.

Purpose To evaluate the role of dynamic contrast-enhanced CT (DCE-CT) as an independent non-invasive biomarker in predicting long term outcome in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) on antiangiogenic treatment. Material and methods Eighty two mRCC patients were prospectively enrolled from 09/2011 to 04/2015, out of which 71 were included in the final data analysis; the population was observed until 12/2020 to obtain complete overall survival data. DCE-CT imaging was performed at baseline and 10 to 12 weeks after start of treatment with targeted therapy. DCE-CT included a dynamic acquisition after injection of 50 ml of nonionic contrast agent at 6 ml/s using a 4D spiral mode (10 cm z-axis coverage, acquisition time 43 sec, 100 kVp (abdomen), 80 kVp (chest), 80–100 mAs) on a dual source scanner (Definition FLASH, Siemens). Blood flow (BF) was calculated for target tumor volumes using a deconvolution model. Progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier statistics (SPSS version 24). Results Patients were treated with either sunitinib, pazopanib, sorafenib, tivozanib, axitinib, or cabozantinib. A cut-off value of 50% blood flow reduction at follow-up allowed for identification of patients with favorable long-term outcome: Median OS in n = 42 patients with an average blood flow reduction of >50% (mean, 79%) was 34 (range, 14–54) months, while n = 21 patients with an average reduction of less than 50% (mean, 28%) showed a median OS of 12 (range, 6–18) months, and n = 8 patients with an increase in blood flow survived for a median of 7 (range, 3–11) months. Conclusion Blood flow in metastases measured with DCE-CT at first follow-up is a strong predictor of overall survival in mRCC patients on antiangiogenic treatment.

Simple Summary: Treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) remains a challenge due to the lack of biomarkers indicating the optimal drug for each patient. This study analyzed blood samples of patients with predominant clear cell mRCC who were treated with the mTOR inhibitor everolimus after failure of one prior tumor therapy. In an exploratory approach, predictive blood biomarkers were searched. We found lower levels of the protein thrombospondin-2 (TSP-2) at the start of the therapy and higher lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels in serum two weeks after therapy initiation to be associated with therapy response. Of note, these blood biomarkers had a higher predictive value than baseline patient parameters or risk classifications. Polymorphisms in the mTOR gene appeared to be associated with therapy response, but were not significant. To conclude, it seems feasible to identify patients showing longtime responses to everolimus and possible to increase tumor therapy response rates based on biomarkers for individual therapy selection. Abstract: There is an unmet need for predictive biomarkers in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) therapy. The phase IV MARC-2 trial searched for predictive blood biomarkers in patients with predominant clear cell mRCC who benefit from second-line treatment with everolimus. In an exploratory approach, potential biomarkers were assessed employing proteomics, ELISA, and polymorphism analyses. Lower levels of angiogenesis-related protein thrombospondin-2 (TSP-2) at baseline (≤665 parts per billion, ppb) identified therapy responders with longer median progression-free survival (PFS; ≤665 ppb at baseline: 6.9 months vs. 1.8, p = 0.005). Responders had higher lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) levels in serum two weeks after therapy initiation (>27.14 nmol/L), associated with a longer median PFS (3.8 months vs. 2.2, p = 0.013) and improved overall survival (OS; 31.0 months vs. 14.0 months, p < 0.001). Baseline TSP-2 levels had a stronger relation to PFS (HR 0.36, p = 0.008) than baseline patient parameters, including IMDC score. Increased serum LDH levels two weeks after therapy initiation were the best predictor for OS (HR 0.21, p < 0.001). mTOR polymorphisms appeared to be associated with therapy response but were not significant. Hence, we identified TSP-2 and LDH as promising predictive biomarkers for therapy response on everolimus after failure of one VEGF-targeted therapy in patients with clear cell mRCC.

Despite rapid advances of systemic therapy options in renal cell carcinoma (RCC), local tumor or metastases treatment remains important in selected patients. Here, we assess the safety and efficacy of robotic radiosurgery (RRS) as an ablative therapy for visceral and lymph node metastases of RCC. Patients with histologically confirmed RCC and radiologically confirmed progression of visceral or lymph node metastases underwent RRS and were retrospectively analyzed. Overall survival and progression free survival were calculated by the Kaplan–Meier method and log-rank test. Sixty patients underwent RRS and were included in the analysis. Patients presented for RRS treatment with a median age at RRS treatment of 64 years (range 42–83), clear cell histology (88.3%) and favorable international metastatic renal cell carcinoma database (IMDC) risk score (58.3%). Treatment parameters differed for the number of fractions (median visceral metastases: 1, range 1–5, median lymph node metastases: 1, range 0–5, p = 0.003) and prescription dose (median visceral metastases 24 Gy, range 8–26, median lymph node metastases 18 Gy, range 7–26, p &lt, 0.001). The median overall survival was 65.7 months (range: 2.9–108.6), the median progression free survival was 17.4 months (range: 2.7–70.0) and local tumor control was achieved in 96.7% of patients. Adverse events were limited to 8.3% of patients, with one grade 4 toxicity within 6 weeks after RRS therapy. RRS is a safe and effective treatment option in selected patients with metastatic RCC in a multimodal approach. Further research is warranted to confirm our findings prospectively.

Aim: To examine the prognostic value of the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) in the adjuvant renal cell carcinoma setting. Materials & methods: Patients received adjuvant sunitinib (50 mg/day; 4 weeks on/2 weeks off) or placebo. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). Results: In 609 patients, DFS was similar for baseline PLR Clinical Trials Registration: NCT00375674 ( ClinicalTrials.gov )

METEOR was a phase 3 trial (NCT01865747) of cabozantinib versus everolimus in adults with advanced or metastatic clear cell RCC previously treated with VEGF receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). This post hoc analysis of METEOR compared outcomes for patients recruited from European and non-European countries. Adults with advanced/metastatic clear cell RCC who had received ��� 1 prior VEGFR-TKI treatment were randomized 1:1 to receive cabozantinib or everolimus. Patients were categorized by recruitment region: Europe or outside of Europe (rest of world [RoW]). Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs) were compared between regional subgroups. In total, there were 320 eligible patients from Europe (cabozantinib, 167; everolimus, 153) and 338 from RoW (North America, 240 patients; Asia-Pacific, 86; Latin America, 12; randomized as cabozantinib, 163; everolimus, 175). PFS and OS were longer with cabozantinib than with everolimus and similar for the Europe and RoW subgroups. For PFS, the hazard ratio (HR) for cabozantinib versus everolimus was 0.54 for the Europe subgroup (p < .001) and 0.50 for the RoW subgroup (p < .001). For OS, the HR was 0.75 for the Europe subgroup (p = .034) and 0.69 for the RoW subgroup (p = .006). ORR in the Europe subgroup was 15% for cabozantinib and 3.9% for everolimus (p < .001). For the RoW subgroup, ORR was 20% for cabozantinib and 2.9% for everolimus (p < .001). Incidence of grade 3/4 AEs were similar for the Europe (cabozantinib, 74%; everolimus, 58%) and RoW subgroups (cabozantinib, 69%; everolimus, 64%). In the METEOR trial, efficacy outcomes for patients recruited from European and non-European countries favored cabozantinib over everolimus. The efficacy and safety results for the regional subgroups were consistent with those of the overall METEOR population.

Context The epidemiological signature of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) during the past decades is explained by overdetection and overtreatment of indolent cancers; furthermore, a non-negligible proportion of patients undergoing surgery for suspected RCC harbour benign renal tumours. As the gold standard for RCC diagnosis remains histopathological analysis of surgical or biopsy specimens, implementation of noninvasive diagnostic strategies to discriminate between benign and malignant renal masses is an urgent unmet need. Objective To systematically review novel liquid biomarkers and imaging modalities for RCC diagnosis. Evidence acquisition A systematic review of the recent English-language literature was conducted according to the European Association of Urology guidelines and the PRISMA statement recommendations (PROSPERO ID: CRD42020190773) using the MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. Risk-of-bias assessment was performed according to the QUADAS 2 tool. Evidence synthesis Overall, 15 studies (six on biomarkers and nine on imaging) and eight clinical trials were included. None of the biomarkers or imaging modalities has been validated or shown to have a distinct clinical value for RCC. Specific combinations of urinary cell-free and exosomal miRNAs, urinary miR-15a, and specific panels of urinary metabolites assessed by metabolomics appear promising. In addition, machine/deep learning algorithms and radiomics applied to cross-sectional images may have potential to improve RCC diagnosis. Most studies are limited by the retrospective design, size, and lack of external validation. Conclusions Liquid biomarkers or imaging modalities are not ready for integration in the clinic and further well-designed studies must validate preliminary findings and explore utility in clinical decision-making. Patient summary We provide a comprehensive overview of the currently available biomarkers (measured in blood or urine) and novel imaging tests (other than conventional imaging) to discriminate kidney cancer from benign renal masses in a noninvasive fashion. None of the biomarkers or imaging modalities studied was validated or added clinical value; therefore, none of them can be implemented in the clinic. However, these approaches appear to be promising for improving the diagnosis of kidney cancer in the future.

Background While providers are challenged with treatment decisions during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis, decision making ultimately falls in the hands of patients—at present, their perspective is poorly understood. Objective To ascertain renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients’ perspectives on COVID-19 and understand the associated implications for treatment. Design, setting, and participants An online survey of RCC patients was conducted from March 22 to March 25, 2020, disseminated through social media and patient networking platforms. The survey comprised 45 items, including baseline demographic, clinicopathologic, and treatment-related information. Patients were additionally queried regarding their anxiety level related to COVID-19 and associated implications for their cancer diagnosis. Intervention An online survey study. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Descriptive statistics with graphical outputs were used to characterize survey results. Results and limitations A total of 539 patients (male:female 39%:58%) from 14 countries responded. Of them, 71% felt that their risk of COVID-19 infection was higher than the general population, and 27% contacted their physician to establish this. Among patients with localized disease (40%), most (42%) had scheduled surveillance scans within 6 wk–65% were unwilling to delay scans. Among patients with metastatic disease, 76% were receiving active therapy. While most patients preferred not to defer therapy (51%), patients receiving immune therapy regimens were less amenable to deferring therapy than those receiving targeted treatment (20% vs 47%). Conclusions Despite high levels of anxiety surrounding COVID-19, many patients with RCC were inclined to adhere to existing schedules of surveillance (localized disease) and systemic treatment (metastatic disease). Patient summary The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has prompted many doctors to develop different treatment strategies for cancer and other chronic conditions. Given the importance of the patient voice in these strategies, we conducted a survey of patients with kidney cancer to determine their treatment preferences. Our survey highlighted that most patients prefer to continue their current strategies of kidney cancer treatment and monitoring., Take Home Message Through an online survey of 539 renal cell carcinoma patients conducted over a 3-d span, we identified that patients have significant anxiety related to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which is counterbalanced by a similar level of anxiety related to cancer recurrence or progression. The majority of patients did not want to alter previously designated plans for cancer surveillance or treatment.

Temsirolimus has long been the only approved first-line standard of care (SOC) with overall survival (OS) benefit in poor-risk patients with advanced or metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). However, tyrosine kinase inhibitors are also commonly used in clinical practice. Pazopanib is an SOC for first-line mRCC treatment, but for poor-risk patients data are scarce. The FLIPPER (First-Line Pazopanib in Poor-Risk Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma) study aimed to assess efficacy and safety of first-line pazopanib in poor-risk mRCC patients. FLIPPER was a single-arm, multicenter, Phase IV trial. Key inclusion criteria were treatment-naive clear cell, inoperable advanced or mRCC, poor-risk according to MSKCC with slight modification, Karnofsky performance status (KPS) ≥60% and adequate organ function. Oral pazopanib 800 mg was given daily. Primary endpoint was the 6-month progression-free survival rate (PFS6). Secondary endpoints included PFS, OS, overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR) and safety. For analysis, descriptive statistics were used. Between 2012 and 2016, 60 patients had been included. Forty-three patients qualified for safety analyses, 34 for efficacy. Median age was 66 years, 64.7% of patients were poor-risk, 82.4% had a KPS ≤70%. PFS6 was 35.3% (95% CI, 19.7-53.5). Median PFS and OS were 4.5 months (95% CI, 3.6-7.8) and 9.3 months (95% CI, 6.6-22.2), respectively. ORR was 32.4% (95% CI, 17.4-50.5), median DOR 9.7 months (95% CI, 1.8-12.4). The most common treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse event reported in 4.7% of patients was hypertension. No treatment-related death occurred. Since pazopanib is active and well tolerated in poor-risk patients with clear cell mRCC, our results support its use as first-line treatment in this setting.

Bosniak 2F renal cystic lesions feature morphologic characteristics between Bosniak I and III categories, the majority of which remain benign. However, a minor part of Bosniak 2F lesions may progress to malignancy. The purpose of this study was to assess Bosniak 2F cystic lesions during follow-up examinations by CEUS. One-hundred-and-twelve out of 364 patients with Bosniak 2F lesions underwent follow-up CEUS examinations between February 2008 and February 2020. Twelve out of 364 patients underwent renal surgery without follow-up CEUS. The progression rate of Bosniak 2F renal lesions detected by CEUS accounted for 7.1% (8/112 patients) after a mean of 12.9 months. The first follow-up CEUS revealed 75% of progressions (6/8), the remaining 25% (2/8) of progressions were detected during second follow-up CEUS. Underlying clear-cell renal cell carcinoma was histopathologically validated in 5/8 progressive complex cystic renal lesions. Stable sonomorphologic features were observed in 92.1% (104/112 patients). CEUS depicts a promising diagnostic imaging modality in the diagnostic work-up and follow-up of complex renal cystic lesions at higher spatial and temporal resolutions than CT or MRI. Its excellent safety profile, its easy and repeatable accessibility, and low financial costs render CEUS an attractive and powerful alternative imaging tool for monitoring complex renal cystic lesions.

Purpose To ascertain renal cell carcinoma (RCC) financial toxicity on COVID-19 during the COVID-19 crisis as patients are struggling with therapeutic and financial implications. Methods An online survey was conducted from March 22 to March 25, 2020. It included baseline demographic, clinicopathologic, treatment-related information, anxiety levels related to COVID-19, questions related to financial concerns about COVID-19 as well as the validated 11-item COST measure. Results Five-hundred-and-thirty-nine patients (39%:58% male:female) from 14 countries responded. 23% of the patients did not feel in control of their financial situation but 8% reported being very satisfied with their finances. The median COST score was 21.5 (range 1–44). Metastatic patients who have not started systemic therapy had a COST score (19.8 range 2–41) versus patients on oral systemic therapy had a COST score (23.9 range 4–44). Patients in follow-up after surgery had a median COST score at 20.8 (range 1–40). A low COST scores correlated (p r = 0.108), younger age (r = 0.210), urban living situation (r = 0.68), a lower educational level (r = 0.155), lower income (r = 0.165), higher anxiety about acquiring COVID-19 (r = 0.198), having metastatic disease (r = 0.073) and a higher distress score about cancer progression (r = 0.224). Conclusion Our data highlight severe financial impact of COVID-19. Acknowledging financial hardship and thorough counseling of cancer patients should be part of the conversation during the pandemic. Treatment and surveillance of RCC patients might have to be adjusted to contemplate financial and medical needs.

Renal medullary carcinoma (RMC) is one of the most aggressive renal cell carcinomas. It predominantly afflicts young adults and adolescents with sickle cell trait and other sickle hemoglobinopathies, and is refractory to targeted and antiangiogenic therapies used in patients with clear-cell renal cell carcinoma. Platinum-based cytotoxic chemotherapy is the mainstay for RMC treatment. On the basis of recent advances in the diagnosis, management, and clinical trial development for RMC, a panel of experts met in October 2017 and developed updated consensus recommendations to inform clinicians, researchers, and patients. Because RMC often aggressively recurs while patients are still recovering from nephrectomy, upfront chemotherapy should be considered for most patients, including those with localized disease. After safety and dosing information has been established in adults, phase II and III trials enrolling patients with RMC should allow patients aged 12 years and older to be accrued. Patients with the very rare unclassified renal cell carcinoma with medullary phenotype variant should be included in RMC trials. Medical providers should be aware that RMC can afflict subjects of all races, and not only those of African descent, and that the presence of sickle cell trait, or of other sickle hemoglobinopathies, can affect drug responses and toxicity.

Papillary renal cell carcinoma (PRCC) is currently divided in 2 subtypes. We reviewed a large cohort of PRCC and correlated subtype, morphological features and diagnostic marker expression with overall survival (OS) to uncover differences between the 2 subtypes. Three hundred seventy-six renal tumors initially diagnosed as PRCC with clinical and survival data were collected from the participating centers. Two hundred forty-six tumors were classified as PRCC1 (65.4%) and 130 as PRCC2 (34.6%) and graded according to the 2016 World Health Organization/International Society of Urological Pathology grading system. Morphological features (abundant cytoplasm, necrosis, fibrous stroma, foamy macrophages and psammoma bodies) were noted. Immunohistochemical stains (MIB1, p53, Racemase, EMA, CK7, CK20, E-Cadherin) were performed using tissue microarrays. χ2-Tests, log-rank tests and uni- and multivariate Cox regression analysis were performed. Both subtypes displayed different morphological features and immunohistochemical profiles: abundant cytoplasm was more frequent in PRCC2, while foamy macrophages were more common in PRCC1. Abundant cytoplasm and presence of psammoma bodies were associated with poorer OS. PRCC1 showed more frequent CK7 expression, PRCC2 more frequent E-Cadherin, p53 and higher MIB1 expression (>15%). Expression of Racemase and CK7 was associated with better OS, while high MIB1 (>15%) was associated with poorer OS. In multivariate analysis, the only independent predictors of OS were proliferation (MIB1), tumor stage, metastasis and age at surgery. Subtype was not an independent prognostic factor. Therefore, PRCC subtype on its own is not suitable for estimating survival. More data focusing on PRCC tumor biology is needed to define prognostic subgroups, especially in PRCC2.

The optimal follow-up (FU) strategy for patients treated for localised renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remains unclear. Using the RECUR database, we studied imaging intensity utilised in contemporary FU to evaluate its association with outcome after detection of disease recurrence. Consecutive patients with nonmetastatic RCC (n = 1612) treated with curative intent at 12 institutes across eight European countries between 2006 and 2011 were included. Recurrence occurred in 336 patients. Cross-sectional (computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging) and conventional (chest X-ray, ultrasound) methods were used in 47% and 53%, respectively. More intensive FU imaging (more than twofold) than recommended by the European Association of Urology (EAU) was not associated with improved overall survival (OS) after recurrence. Overall, per patient treated for recurrence remaining alive with no evidence of disease, the number of FU images needed was 542, and 697 for high-risk patients. The study results suggest that use of more imaging during FU than that recommended in the 2017 EAU guidelines is unlikely to improve OS after recurrence. Prospective studies are needed to design optimal FU strategies for the future. Patient summary: After curative treatment for localised kidney cancer, follow-up is necessary to detect any recurrence. This study illustrates that increasing the imaging frequency during follow-up, even to double the number of follow-up imaging procedures recommended by the European Association of Urology guidelines, does not translate into improved survival for those with recurrence. After curative treatment for localised kidney cancer, a more intensive follow-up regimen than that recommended in the 2017 European Association of Urology guidelines did not improve overall survival among those experiencing recurrence, irrespective of the risk of recurrence. This suggests that an increase in follow-up imaging frequency is not cost-efficient. Prospective studies to identify more optimal follow-up strategies are needed.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE:UTUC is rare form of kidney cancer and prognostic factors in localized disease seem unclear. We sought to investigate oncological outcomes depending on baseline character...

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE:High-dose local stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) has been introduced as non-invasive alternative to surgery in renal masses. We compared patients with renal tumors who wer...

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE:Surgical resection remains the standard of care for localized Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC). Approximately 75 percent of RCC patients will be diagnosed with localized diseas...

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE:Cyberknife (CK) radiosurgery has shown efficacy in treatment of localized renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and is a valid alternative to surgery in selected patients. However, ...

Context Management of locally recurrent renal cancer is complex. Objective In this systematic review we analyse the available literature on the management of local renal cancer recurrence. Evidence acquisition A systematic search (PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Clinical Trials, and Scopus) of English literature from 2000 to 2017 was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Evidence synthesis The search identified 1838 articles. Of those, 36 were included in the evidence synthesis. The majority of the studies identified were retrospective and not controlled. Local recurrence after thermal ablation (TA) may be managed with repeat TA. Alternatively, salvage nephrectomy is possible. However, a higher rate of complications should be expected than after primary nephrectomy. Salvage nephrectomy and TA represent treatment options for local recurrence after partial nephrectomy. Local retroperitoneal recurrence after radical nephrectomy is ideally treated with surgical resection, for which minimally invasive approaches might be applicable to select patients. For large recurrences, addition of intraoperative radiation may improve local control. Local tumour destruction appears to be more beneficial than systemic therapy alone for local recurrences. Conclusions Management of local renal cancer relapse varies according to the clinical course and prior treatments. The available data are mainly limited to noncontrolled retrospective series. After nephron-sparing treatment, TA represents an effective treatment with low morbidity. For local recurrence after radical nephrectomy, the low-level evidence available suggests superiority of surgical excision relative to systemic therapy or best supportive care. As a consequence, surgery should be prioritised when feasible and applicable. Patient summary In renal cell cancer, the occurrence and management of local recurrence depend on the initial treatment. This cancer is a disease with a highly variable clinical course. After initial organ-sparing treatment, thermal ablation offers good cancer control and low rates of complications. For recurrence after radical nephrectomy, surgical excision seems to provide the best long-term cancer control and it is superior to medical therapy alone.

Bone is a major site of haematogenous tumour cell spread in renal cell carcinoma (RCC), and most patients with RCC will develop painful and functionally disabling bone metastases at advanced disease stages. The prognosis of these patients is generally poor and the treatment is, therefore, aimed at palliation. However, RCC-associated bone metastases can be curable in select patients. Current data support a multimodal management strategy that includes wide resection of lesions, radiotherapy, systemic therapy, and other local treatment options, which can improve quality of life and survival. Nevertheless, the optimal approach for metastatic bone disease in RCC has not yet been defined and practical recommendations are rare. To improve the management and outcomes of patients with RCC and bone metastases, the International Kidney Cancer Coalition and the interdisciplinary working group on renal tumours of the German Cancer Society convened a meeting of experts with a global perspective to perform an unstructured review and elaborate on current treatment strategies on the basis of published data and expertise. The panel formulated recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with RCC and metastasis to the bone. Furthermore, the experts summarized current challenges and unmet patient needs that should be addressed in the future., In this Expert Consensus, Grünwald et al. summarize their recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with renal cell carcinoma and metastasis to the bone. They also outline current challenges and unmet patient needs that should be addressed in the future.

BACKGROUND Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is an emerging therapy for primary renal cell carcinoma. The authors assessed safety, efficacy, and survival in a multi-institutional setting. Outcomes between single-fraction and multifraction SABR were compared. METHODS Individual patient data sets from 9 International Radiosurgery Oncology Consortium for Kidney institutions across Germany, Australia, the United States, Canada, and Japan were pooled. Toxicities were recorded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.0. Patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics were stratified according to the number of radiotherapy fractions (single vs multiple). Survival outcomes were examined using Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox proportional-hazards regression. RESULTS Of 223 patients, 118 received single-fraction SABR, and 105 received multifraction SABR. The mean patient age was 72 years, and 69.5% of patients were men. There were 83 patients with grade 1 and 2 toxicity (35.6%) and 3 with grade 3 and 4 toxicities (1.3%). The rates of local control, cancer-specific survival, and progression-free survival were 97.8%, 95.7%, and 77.4%, respectively, at 2 years; and they were 97.8%, 91.9%, and 65.4%, respectively, at 4 years. On multivariable analysis, tumors with a larger maximum dimension and the receipt of multifraction SABR were associated with poorer progression-free survival (hazard ratio, 1.16 [P

IntroductionBecause “real-life” patients often do not meet the strict eligibility criteria of clinical trials, we assessed the trial eligibility of patients with advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in routine practice and compared the survival of “trial-ineligible” and potentially “trial-eligible” patients.Patients and MethodsThe present prospective, multicenter German cohort study is recruiting patients from 110 oncology/urology outpatient centers and hospitals at initiation of systemic first-line treatment. The demographic, clinical, treatment, and survival data were collected. We defined patients as “trial-ineligible” when ≥ 1 exclusion criterion (Karnofsky performance status < 80%, hemoglobin less than the lower limit of normal, non–clear cell carcinoma histology) was documented. Otherwise, the patients were considered “trial-eligible”.ResultsOf 732 patients included, 57% were classified as “trial-ineligible”. Overall, the median first-line progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.9-8.9 months). The median first-line PFS of “trial-eligible” and “trial-ineligible” patients was 11.0 months (95% CI, 9.6-13.1 months) and 5.3 months (95% CI, 4.6-6.5 months), respectively. The median OS of the “trial-eligible” and “trial-ineligible” patients was 26.0 months (95% CI, 22.1-29.7 months) and 12.6 months (95% CI, 10.6-15.8 months), respectively.ConclusionOur data suggest that patients in routine practice differ from patients treated in clinical trials and that almost 60% of mRCC patients in German routine practice would be ineligible for participation in clinical trials. While their first-line PFS and OS were shorter than those of “trial-eligible” patients, the PFS and OS of “trial-eligible” patients were comparable with the results from clinical trials. Physicians should be aware of these differences when discussing treatment options and outcome expectations with patients.

Metanephric adenoma (MA) describes a rare renal tumor and is generally considered a benign lesion. However, there are cases with regional lymphogenic and distant metastases. Noninvasive diagnosis of MA using conventional imaging remains challenging. Here, we describe a case of histologically verified MA with additional advanced molecular imaging consisting of 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT, 99mTc-Sestamibi SPECT and contrast-enhanced ultrasound.

Purpose: In the S-TRAC trial, adjuvant sunitinib improved disease-free survival (DFS) compared with placebo in patients with locoregional renal cell carcinoma (RCC) at high risk of recurrence. This post hoc exploratory analysis investigated the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) for predictive and prognostic significance in the RCC adjuvant setting. Experimental Design: Kaplan–Meier estimates and Cox proportional analyses were performed on baseline NLR and change from baseline at week 4 to assess their association with DFS. Univariate P values were two-sided and based on an unstratified log-rank test. Results: 609 of 615 patients had baseline NLR values; 574 patients had baseline and week 4 values. Sunitinib-treated patients with baseline NLR Conclusions: In the postnephrectomy high-risk RCC patient cohort, low baseline NLR may help identify those most suitable for adjuvant sunitinib. A ≥25% NLR decrease at week 4 may be an early indicator of those most likely to tolerate treatment and derive DFS benefit.

Digital technologies allow for the remote monitoring of cancer patients and thereby close an important care gap. Despite a variety of upcoming digital health-tech solutions, there is little knowledge on uro-oncologic patients' perception of digital technologies in clinical care and cancer trials.A questionnaire was developed to evaluate patients' current use, preferences, and expectations of digital health technology. Patients receiving systemic treatment for urothelial, prostate, and renal-cell carcinoma were included during outpatient visits.Ninety-seven patients undergoing systemic therapy for metastatic renal-cell, urothelial, or prostate cancer were included in the final analysis. Internet, smartphone, and wearable user rates were significantly higher in younger patients (100% user rate in age group 40-49 years vs. 38% in age group 80-89 years). Patients were more likely to use wearables in clinical trials when they received the generated data (2.9/5) than when they did not (2.3/5, P .0001). Interest in activity data (3.7/5) was higher than sleeping data (2.7/5, P .0001), but desire for sleeping data increases with advancement of treatment lines (3.9, P = .008). Patients prefer a digital follow-up every 2.6 days; younger patients and those receiving advanced therapy lines prefer less frequent follow-up (respectively, every 3.3 days, P = .050, and every 4.0 days, P = .0001). Patients allow a maximum of an average of 2.2 minutes daily for digital follow-up.We observed high engagement in digital technologies and interest in the data generated by digital devices. However, for the development of future health care applications, aspects such as patient age, gender, and therapy line need to be considered in uro-oncologic patients.

Background Cancer du Rein Metastatique Nephrectomie et Antiangiogeniques (CARMENA) concluded that sunitinib alone is not inferior to cytoreductive nephrectomy (CN) followed by vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. It remains uncertain whether deferred CN is beneficial in this setting. Objective The aim of this study was to compare outcome in patients treated with presurgical VEGFR-TKI followed by CN (deferred CN) with that in patients receiving CN followed by VEGFR-TKI (upfront CN). Design, setting, and participants Pooled data from prospective trials in which a strategy of deferred CN in the absence of disease progression was investigated were compared with a retrospective dataset of upfront CN. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Overall survival (OS) in the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) intermediate-risk group. Results and limitations Patients were treated between 2006 and 2016. In the MSKCC intermediate-risk group, 144 patients with a strategy of deferred CN after systemic therapy were compared with 131 patients treated with upfront CN. OS in the deferred cohort was 33.0 mo (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.0–51.0) compared with 22.8 mo (95% CI 17.9–30.6) after upfront CN (hazard ratio 0.72 [95% CI 0.52–0.996], p = 0.047). This study is limited by retrospective comparison of data, subgroup analysis, and a lack of intention-to-treat data for the upfront CN cohort. Conclusions In MSKCC intermediate-risk patients, a strategy of deferred CN in the absence of progression yields OS, which compares favourably with upfront CN and published trial data from CARMENA. This warrants a formal individual patient data analysis of CARMENA, SURTIME, and single-arm prospective studies to define the role and timing of deferred CN in intermediate-risk patients. Patient summary In this study, we report outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer treated with targeted therapy followed by nephrectomy, which compared favourably with nephrectomy followed by targeted therapy and results from published studies.

Objectives We conducted this study to analyze the survival rates of patients with advanced renal tumors

Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are a relatively new class of oral antidiabetic drugs. The US FDA has recently published a new warning about the safety of SGLT2 inhibitor administration in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients. There is an emerging evidence of an increased risk for developing Fournier´s gangrene (FG; a life-threatening complication) while under SGLT2 therapy. However, there are only three case reports and a total of 55 patients reported by the FDA to date. Therefore, there is a lack of evidence-based treatment algorithms for clinicians. We present the case of a 39-year-old male patient with diabetes on oral dapagliflozin, metformin, and sitagliptin therapy who was admitted with FG to our hospital. Following emergency scrotal surgery, he had to be transferred to the intensive care unit due to respiratory and circulatory insufficiency. After a prolonged 27-day hospital stay with delirium, blood glucose imbalance, and five further surgical interventions, the patient was stabilized and discharged. Dapagliflozin was discontinued permanently. This case demonstrates the risks of SGLT2 inhibitor therapy and the importance of early discontinuation after the occurrence of severe adverse events such as FG. According to the evidence in the literature, deranged glucose levels before admission are a common risk factor. However, further studies are required to identify patients at risks for FG and to investigate a direct connection with SGLT2 inhibitors.

Objectives This study developed, and established the content validity, of a conversation aid tool (CAT) for use in clinical practice with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients who receive a curative nephrectomy and are at high-risk of recurrence. The CAT was pilot tested in a sample of RCC patients to establish whether the CAT increases knowledge of RCC, treatment options (such as adjuvant therapy), and care options. Methods A cross-sectional, mixed methods design was used involving initial, exploratory interviews with RCC patients, RCC specialists and a steering group. Further content validation interviews were conducted with RCC patients and specialists. A web-based survey was conducted with RCC patients (N = 60), to compare the CAT versus a standard of care (SOC) consultation comparator tool on patient knowledge. Results Findings from exploratory interviews were used to develop the CAT. Content validation interviews demonstrated that the CAT was well understood and relevant to RCC patients. The web-based survey demonstrated that viewing the CAT significantly improved participants knowledge of RCC, and care options, when compared to the SOC. Conclusion The findings highlight that the CAT is a relevant, comprehensive and well-understood tool for use in the post-nephrectomy consultation. Practice implications Use of the CAT may increase patient knowledge of RCC and care options.

Background: Optimal follow-up (FU) strategy to detect potentially curable (PC) recurrences after treatment of localised clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) is unclear. This study retrospectively analysed a large international database to determine recurrence patterns and overall survival (OS), as part of a wider project to issue recommendations on FU protocols. Objective: To analyse associations between RCC recurrences in patients with ccRCC, their risk group stratifications, treatments, and subsequent outcomes. Design, setting, and participants: Nonmetastatic ccRCC patients treated with curative intent between 1 January 2006 and 31 December 2011, with at least 4 yr of FU, were included. Patient, tumour and recurrence characteristics, Leibovich score, and management and survival data were recorded. Isolated local, solitary, and oligometastatic (three or fewer lesions at a single site) recurrences were considered PC, while all others were probably incurable (PI). Intervention: Primarily curative surgical treatment of ccRCC while at recurrence detection metastasectomy, systemic therapy, best supportive care, or observation. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Incidence, time to recurrence (TTR), and OS were measured. Competing risk analysis, Kaplan-Meier, and Cox regression models were used. Results and limitation: Of 1265 patients with ccRCC, 286 had a recurrence, with 131 being PC and 155 PI. Five-year cumulative risks of recurrence for low- (n = 53), intermediate- (n = 105), and high-risk (n = 128) patients were, respectively, 7.2%, 23.2%, and 61.6%, of whom 52.8%, 37.1%, and 30.5% were PC, respectively. Median TTR was 25.0 for PC patients versus 17.3 mo for PI patients (p = 0.004). Median OS was longer in PC compared with that in PI patients (p< 0.001). Competing risk analysis showed highest risk of ccRCC-related death in younger and high-risk patients. Limitations were no data on comorbidities, retrospective cohort, and insufficient data excluding 12% of cohort. Conclusions: Low-risk group recurrences are rare and develop later. Treatment of recurrences with curative intent is disappointing, especially in high-risk patients. An age- and risk score-dependent FU approach is suggested. Patient summary: We analysed data from eight European countries, and found that the incidence of the kidney cancer recurrence and patient survival correlated with clinical factors known to predict cancer recurrence reliably and age. We conclude that these factors should be used to design follow-up strategies. Renal cell carcinoma recurrences are rare in low-risk patients. Potentially curable recurrences are more frequent in high-risk patients, but local treatment is unlikely to be curative. Competing risk analyses suggest age and risk score as important factors in developing follow-up strategies.

Recent randomised trials have demonstrated a survival benefit for a front-line ipilimumab and nivolumab combination therapy, and pembrolizumab and axitinib combination therapy in metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma. The European Association of Urology Guidelines Panel has updated its recommendations based on these studies. PATIENT SUMMARY: Pembrolizumab plus axitinib is a new standard of care for patients diagnosed with kidney cancer spread outside the kidney and who did not receive any prior treatment for their cancer (treatment naive). This applies to all risk groups as determined by the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium criteria.

Context Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is an emerging treatment option for primary renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Objective To systematically review the literature on SABR for primary RCC and perform a meta-analysis evaluating local control (LC), toxicity, and renal function. Evidence acquisition A PROSPERO-registered (#115573), Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA)-based systematic review of the literature was conducted (1995–2019). Studies of SABR targeting primary RCC tumors were included, while those targeting only metastases were excluded. The primary outcome was LC defined as tumor size reduction and/or absence of local progression. Secondary outcomes included toxicity (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) and renal function (change in estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR]). Weighted random-effect meta-analyses using the DerSimonian and Laird method were conducted for primary and secondary outcomes. The I2 statistic and Cochran’s Q test were used to assess heterogeneity. Evidence synthesis From 2386 PubMed entries and 924 meeting abstracts, 26 studies were identified (11 prospective trials), including 383 tumors in 372 patients, most of whom were deemed inoperable. Weighted averages (ranges) of median follow-up, median age, and mean tumor size were 28.0 (5.8–79.2) mo, 70.4 (62–83) yr, and 4.6 (2.3–9.5) cm, respectively. RCC histology was confirmed in 78.9% of patients who underwent pretreatment biopsy. Dose fractionation varied, but 26 Gy in one fraction and 40 Gy in five fractions were most common. The random-effect estimates for LC, grade 3–4 toxicity, and post-SABR eGFR change were 97.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 93.9–99.5%, I2 = 20%), 1.5% (95% CI: 0–4.3%, I2 = 0%), and –7.7 ml/min (95% CI: –12.5 to –2.8, I2 = 2%), respectively, and heterogeneity was minimal. Six patients with pre-existing renal dysfunction (2.9%) required dialysis. Conclusions Renal SABR is locally effective and associated with low toxicity rates for primary RCC, despite treatment of larger tumors in older, mostly medically inoperable patients. Patient summary Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy is a high-precision, noninvasive radiation treatment requiring few outpatient visits, and represents a safe and effective management option for primary renal cell carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES:Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) are reported to predict clinical outcomes in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (m...

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES:Conducted over eight years, enrolling 450 patients at multiple centers in Europe, the CARMENA (Cancer du Rein Metastatique Nephrectomie et Antiangiongeniques) trial demo...

Purpose To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to compare dual inhibition of PI3K/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) by apitolisib (GDC-0980) against single inhibition of mTORC1 by everolimus in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Patients and Methods Patients with clear-cell mRCC who progressed on or after vascular endothelial growth factor–targeted therapy were randomly assigned to apitolisib 40 mg once per day or to everolimus 10 mg once per day. End points included progression-free survival, safety, overall survival, and objective response rate. Biomarker assessments were conducted. Results Eighty-five patients were randomly assigned. After 67 events, stratified analysis revealed that median progression-free survival was significantly shorter for apitolisib than for everolimus (3.7 v 6.1 months; hazard ratio, 2.12 [95% CI, 1.23 to 3.63; P < .01]); apitolisib was not favored in any stratification subgroup. Median overall survival was not significantly different but trended in favor of everolimus (16.5 v 22.8 months; hazard ratio, 1.77 [95% CI, 0.97 to 3.24; P = .06]). The objective response rate was 7.1% for apitolisib and 11.6% for everolimus. Patients administered apitolisib with a greater incidence of grade 3 to 4 adverse events were more likely to discontinue treatment (31% v 12% for everolimus). No drug-related deaths were observed. Apitolisib in comparison with everolimus was associated with substantially more high-grade hyperglycemia (40% v 9%) and rash (24% v 2%). Apitolisib pharmacokinetics suggested a relationship between exposure, and rash and hyperglycemia. Retrospective biomarker analyses revealed a relationship between VHL mutation status and outcome with everolimus but not with apitolisib. High hypoxia-inducible factor 1α protein expression was associated with better outcome in both arms. Conclusion This study demonstrated that dual PI3K/mTOR inhibition by apitolisib was less effective than was everolimus in mRCC, likely because full blockade of PI3K/mTOR signaling resulted in multiple on-target adverse events. VHL mutation and hypoxia-inducible factor 1α expression may be predictive of an mTOR inhibitor benefit, although prospective validation is required.

OBJECTIVES: Renal neoplasms frequently expand into renal veins and inferior vena cava from the early stages of the disease. In this study, we set out to define the long-term outcomes of patients with Stage IV tumorous cavoatrial extension, undergoing radical nephrectomy with excision of cavoatrial extension in deep hypothermic circulatory arrest (DHCA). METHODS: Thirty-five patients with Stage IV cavoatrial extension of renal cell carcinoma underwent radical nephrectomy combined with en bloc excision of cavoatrial tumour-thrombus extension, performed in DHCA. The preoperative staging of the tumour and assessment of the intravascular position of the tumour were performed using standard imaging techniques, including computed tomography angiography, magnetic resonance imaging and echocardiography. Patient data were collected in the patient data bank and analysed retrospectively. RESULTS: In this study cohort, we demonstrate acceptable long-term results (the mean overall survival of 4.9 +/- 1.0 years and the 5-year survival rate of 40%) and outline several clear predictors for postoperative long-term survival of the patients. Preoperative evidence of remote tumour metastases and tumourous lymph node involvement conversely predicts inferior postoperative survival. However, a high local postoperative tumour recurrence rate does not limit patient survival in this group. CONCLUSIONS: The data provide evidence for perioperative safety and acceptable long-term results of radical nephrectomy with excision of cavoatrial extension in DHCA in patients with Stage IV cavoatrial extension of renal neoplasm. Thus, this radical surgical procedure can provide effective long-term palliation in the absence of evident metastatic disease.

We present a 71-year-old female patient who underwent 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT for suspected metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC), as RCC also shows high PSMA-expression in tumor neovascularization. 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT showed a high PSMA-avidity in the renal tumor, enlarged intra-abdominal and mediastinal lymph nodes. Moreover, PSMA-positive pleural, pulmonal and osseous lesions were found. However, histopathology revealed an immature plasma cell myeloma with an endothelial PSMA-expression of the neovasculature. This case illustrates the increased PSMA-avidity in multiple myeloma and highlights PSMA as a potential theragnostic target in multiple myeloma. For clinical routine, lymphatic diseases such as extramedullary myeloma should be considered as differential diagnosis in PSMA-avid renal masses on PET/CT.