Prognostic factors of renal cell carcinoma
Authors:
M. Čechová 1; M. Chocholatý 2; M. Babjuk 1; M. Kalousová 3; T. Zima 3
Authors‘ workplace:
Urologická klinika, 2. lékařská fakulta Univerzity Karlovy a Fakultní nemocnice Motol, Praha
1; Urologické oddělení, Fakultní nemocnice Trenčín
2; Ústav lékařské biochemie a laboratorní diagnostiky, 1. lékařská fakulta Univerzity Karlovy a Všeobecná fakultní nemocnice, Praha
3
Published in:
Rozhl. Chir., 2022, roč. 101, č. 10, s. 469-477.
Category:
Review
doi:
https://doi.org/10.33699/PIS.2022.101.10.469–477
Overview
Renal cell carcinoma represents 2−3% of all adult malignancies and its incidence in the Czech Republic is one of the highest worldwide. Until late stages this disease often remains asymptomatic, which makes its diagnosis difficult. Despite an increasing proportion of small, incidentally detected tumours on imaging, approximately one third of patients are still diagnosed with advanced disease. Moreover, a relapse occurs in up to 40% of patients after surgery for localized tumour. Increased availability of imaging investigations allowing an early detection of kidney carcinoma and advances in systemic treatment have favourably affected the outcome of patients with this type of tumour. Nevertheless, mortality of renal cell carcinoma remains the highest among urological malignancies. The individual course of the disease and its response to systemic treatment are difficult to predict. A number of prognostic factors of renal cell carcinoma have been identified, of which TNM classification and tumour grade remain the most important. Recently, several multivariate prognostic models have become available, allowing a more accurate prediction of the disease course. In localized disease, they are useful in identifying patients at higher risk of recurrence and allow optimization of follow-up after surgery. In metastatic disease, they are routinely used to stratify patients into risk groups for targeted treatment. There has been a long-term effort to identify a suitable biomarker useful for an early detection and assessment of the prognosis of renal cell carcinoma. At the same time, such a biomarker could improve the accuracy of established prognostic systems. This text presents an overview of prognostic factors of renal cell carcinoma, including a summary of potential biomarkers.
Keywords:
prognostic factors – biomarker – Renal cell carcinoma – tumour marker – prognostic models
Sources
1. Capitanio U, Bensalah K, Bex A, et al. Epidemiology of renal cell carcinoma. Eur Urol. 2019;75(1):74−84. doi:10.1016/j. eururo.2018.08.036.
2. Dušek L, Mužík J, Kubásek M, et al. Epidemiologie zhoubných nádorů v České republice [online]. Masarykova univerzita 2005. Available at www:
3. http://www.svod.cz. Verze 7.0 [2007], ISSN 1802-8861.
4. Ljungberg B, Albiges L, Bedke J, et al. EAU guidelines on renal cell carcinoma. Edn. presented at the EAU Annual Congress Milan 2021. ISBN 978-94-92671-13-4. EAU Guidelines Office, Arnhem, The Netherlands. Available at: https://uroweb.org/ guideline/renal-cell-carcinoma/.
5. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics 2018. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68(1):7−30. doi:10.3322/ caac.21442.
6. Speed JM, Trinh QD, Choueiri TK, et al. Recurrence in localized renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review of contemporary data. Curr Urol Rep. 2017;18(2):15. doi:10.1007/s11934-017-0661-3.
7. Brierley JD, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C (Eds.). TNM classification of malignant tumours. John Wiley & Sons 2017. Český překlad TNM verze 2011 available at: https://www.uzis.cz/index.php?pg= record&id=4577.
8. Manola J, Royston P, Elson P, et al. International Kidney Cancer Working Group. Prognostic model for survival in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: results from the international kidney cancer working group. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17(16):5443−5450. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-0553.
9. Warren AY, Harrison D. WHO/ISUP classification, grading and pathological staging of renal cell carcinoma: standards and controversies. World J Urol. 2018;36(12):1913−1926. doi:10.1007/ s00345-018-2447-8.
10. Delahunt B, Kittelson JM, McCredie MR, et al. Prognostic importance of tumor size for localized conventional (clear cell) renal cell carcinoma: assessment of TNM T1 and T2 tumor categories and comparison with other prognostic parameters. Cancer 2002;94(3):658−664. doi:10.1002/ cncr.10255.
11. Bonsib SM. T2 clear cell renal cell carcinoma is a rare entity: a study of 120 clear cell renal cell carcinomas. J Urol. 2005;174(4 Pt 1):1199−202. doi:10.1097/01. ju.0000173631.01329.1f.
12. Bertini R, Roscigno M, Freschi M, et al. Renal sinus fat invasion in pT3a clear cell renal cell carcinoma affects outcomes of patients without nodal involvement or distant metastases. J Urol. 2009;181(5):2027−2032. doi:10.1016/j. juro.2009.01.048.
13. Verhoest G, Avakian R, Bensalah K, et al. Urinary collecting system invasion is an independent prognostic factor of organ confined renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. 2009;182(3):854−859. doi:10.1016/j. juro.2009.05.017.
14. Patard JJ, Leray E, Rioux-Leclercq N, et al. Prognostic value of histologic subtypes in renal cell carcinoma: a multicenter experience. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(12):2763−2771. doi:10.1200/JCO.2005.07.055.
15. Ljungberg B, Albiges L, Bensalah K, et al. EAU guidelines on renal cell carcinoma. Edn. presented at the EAU Annual Congress EAU Guidelines. Edn. presented at the EAU Annual Congress Amsterdam 2020. ISBN 978-94-92671-07-3.
16. Dagher J, Delahunt B, Rioux-Leclercq N, et al. Clear cell renal cell carcinoma: validation of World Health Organization/ International Society of Urological Pathology grading. Histopathology 2017;71(6):9180−925. doi:10.1111/ his.13311.
17. Ohashi R, Martignoni G, Hartmann A, et al. Multi-institutional re-evaluation of prognostic factors in chromophobe renal cell carcinoma: proposal of a novel two-tiered grading scheme. Virchows Arch. 2020;476(3):409−418. doi:10.1007/ s00428-019-02710-w.
18. Leibovich BC, Blute ML, Cheville JC, et al. Prediction of progression after radical nephrectomy for patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma: a stratification tool for prospective clinical trials. Cancer 2003;97(7):1663−1671. doi:10.1002/ cncr.11234.
19. Klatte T, Said JW, de Martino M, et al. Presence of tumor necrosis is not a significant predictor of survival in clear cell renal cell carcinoma: higher prognostic accuracy of extent based rather than presence/absence classification. J Urol. 2009;181(4):1558−1564. doi:10.1016/j. juro.2008.11.098.
20. Kroeger N, Rampersaud EN, Patard JJ, et al. Prognostic value of microvascular invasion in predicting the cancer specific survival and risk of metastatic disease in renal cell carcinoma: a multicenter investigation. J Urol. 2012;187(2):418−423. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2011.10.024.
21. Huang H, Pan XW, Huang Y, et al. Microvascular invasion as a prognostic indicator in renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015;8(7):10779−10792.
22. Antic T, Taxy JB. Partial nephrectomy for renal tumors: lack of correlation between margin status and local recurrence. Am J Clin Pathol. 2015;143(5):645−651. doi:10.1309/AJCP7LKLZ8JSJQRG.
23. Petros FG, Metcalfe MJ, Yu KJ, et al. Oncologic outcomes of patients with positive surgical margin after partial nephrectomy: a 25-year single institution experience. World J Urol. 2018;36(7):1093−1101. doi:10.1007/s00345-018-2241-7.
24. Sun M, Shariat SF, Cheng C, et al. Prognostic factors and predictive models in renal cell carcinoma: a contemporary review. Eur Urol, 2011;60(4):644−661. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2011.06.041.
25. Bensalah K, Leray E, Fergelot P, et al. Prognostic value of thrombocytosis in renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. 2006;175(3 Pt 1):859−863. doi:10.1016/S0022- 5347(05)00526-4.
26. Brookman-May S, May M, Ficarra V, et al. Does preoperative platelet count and thrombocytosis play a prognostic role in patients undergoing nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma? Results of a comprehensive retrospective series. World J Urol. 2013;31(5):1309−1316. doi:10.1007/ s00345-012-0931-0.
27. Shao Y, Wu B, Jia W, et al. Prognostic value of pretreatment neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Urol. 2020;20(1):90. doi:10.1186/s12894- 020-00665-8.
28. Seda CJ, Salas AS, Sánchez CG, et al. Thrombocytosis and hematocrit as prognostic factors in renal carcinoma. Arch Esp Urol. 2011;64(9):883−890.
29. Steffens S, Köhler A, Rudolph R, et al. Validation of CRP as prognostic marker for renal cell carcinoma in a large series of patients. BMC Cancer 2012;12:399. doi:10.1186/1471-2407-12-399.
30. Albiges L, Hakimi AA, Xie W, et al. Body mass index and metastatic renal cell carcinoma: clinical and biological correlations. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(30):3655−3663. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.66.7311.
31. Springer D, Valík D, Kučera R, et al. Doporučení České společnosti klinické biochemie ČLS JEP k využití nádorových markerů v klinické praxi. Klin Biochem Metab. 2021;29 (50):41−55.
32. Klatte T, Seligson DB, Riggs SB, et al. Hypoxia-inducible factor 1 alpha in clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2007;13(24):7388−7393. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-07-0411.
33. Fan Y, Li H, Ma X, et al. Prognostic significance of hypoxia-inducible factor expression in renal cell carcinoma: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore) 2015;94(38):e1646. doi:10.1097/ MD.0000000000001646.
34. Klatte T, Böhm M, Nelius T, et al. Evaluation of peri-operative peripheral and renal venous levels of pro- and anti-angiogenic factors and their relevance in patients with renal cell carcinoma. BJU Int. 2007;100(1):209−214. doi:10.1111/ j.1464-410X.2007.06871.x.
35. Bui MH, Visapaa H, Seligson D, et al. Prognostic value of carbonic anhydrase IX and KI67 as predictors of survival for renal clear cell carcinoma. J Urol. 2004;171(6 Pt 1):2461−2466. doi:10.1097/01. ju.0000116444.08690.e2.
36. Leibovich BC, Sheinin Y, Lohse CM, et al. Carbonic anhydrase IX is not an independent predictor of outcome for patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(30):4757−4764. doi:10.1200/JCO.2007.12.1087.
37. Li G, Feng G, Gentil-Perret A, et al. Serum carbonic anhydrase 9 level is associated with postoperative recurrence of conventional renal cell cancer. J Urol. 2008;180(2):510−513; discussion 513−514. doi:10.1016/j.juro.2008.04.024.
38. Sim SH, Messenger MP, Gregory WM, et al. Prognostic utility of pre-operative circulating osteopontin, carbonic anhydrase IX and CRP in renal cell carcinoma. Br J Cancer 2012;107(7):1131−1137. doi:10.1038/bjc.2012.360.
39. Liu S, Tian Z, Zhang L, et al. Combined cell surface carbonic anhydrase 9 and CD147 antigens enable high-efficiency capture of circulating tumor cells in clear cell renal cell carcinoma patients. Oncotarget 2016;7(37):59877−59891. doi:10.18632/ oncotarget.10979.
40. Pantuck AJ, Seligson DB, Klatte T, et al. Prognostic relevance of the mTOR pathway in renal cell carcinoma: implications for molecular patient selection for targeted therapy. Cancer 2007;109(11):2257−2267. doi:10.1002/ cncr.22677.
41. Parker AS, Kosari F, Lohse CM, et al. High expression levels of survivin protein independently predict a poor outcome for patients who undergo surgery for clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Cancer 2006;107(1):37−45. doi:10.1002/ cncr.21952.
42. Klatte T, Seligson DB, LaRochelle J, et al. Molecular signatures of localized clear cell renal cell carcinoma to predict disease-free survival after nephrectomy. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2009;18(3):894−900. doi:10.1158/1055- 9965.EPI-08-0786.
43. Sobotka R, Capoun O, Hanus T, et al. The importance of serum osteopontin and stanniocalcin-1 in renal cell carcinoma. Neoplasma 2018;65(6):958−964. doi:10.4149/neo_2018_171123N759.
44. Scelo G, Muller DC, Riboli E, et al. KIM-1 as a blood-based marker for early detection of kidney cancer: A prospective nested case-control study. Clin Cancer Res. 2018;24(22):5594−5601. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-1496.
45. Joseph RW, Kapur P, Serie DJ, et al. Clear cell renal cell carcinoma subtypes identified by BAP1 and PBRM1 expression. J Urol. 2016;195(1):180−187. doi:10.1016/j. juro.2015.07.113.
46. Minardi D, Lucarini G, Milanese G, et al. Loss of nuclear BAP1 protein expression is a marker of poor prognosis in patients with clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Urol Oncol. 2016;34(8):338.e11−8. doi:10.1016/j.urolonc.2016.03.006.
47. Okita K, Hatakeyama S, Tanaka T, et al. Impact of disagreement between two risk group models on prognosis in patients with metastatic renal-cell carcinoma. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2019;17(3):e440− e446. doi:10.1016/j.clgc.2019.01.006.
48. Massari F, Di Nunno V, Guida A, et al. Addition of primary metastatic site on bone, brain, and liver to IMDC criteria in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A validation study. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2021;19(1):32−40. doi:10.1016/j. clgc.2020.06.003.
Labels
Surgery Orthopaedics Trauma surgeryArticle was published in
Perspectives in Surgery
2022 Issue 10
Most read in this issue
- Cholangiocelulární karcinom z pohledu patologa
- Prognostic factors of renal cell carcinoma
- Acute appendicitis in supraumbilical hernia
- Inflammatory cloacogenic polyp in an adolescent – case report and review of the literature