The 2022 guideline provides the current best evidence base for renal cell carcinoma management. Changes in medical management in recent years include the use of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), ...ICI–ICI combinations, and ICI-targeted therapy combinations. Surgery remains the mainstay for lower-grade tumours, with increasing use of minimally invasive approaches. More robust data are needed to identify optimal follow-up schedules.
The European Association of Urology (EAU) Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) Guideline Panel has prepared evidence-based guidelines and recommendations for the management of RCC.
To present a summary of the 2022 RCC guideline, which is based on a standardised methodology including systematic reviews (SRs) and provides transparent and reliable evidence for the management of RCC.
For the 2022 update, a new literature search was carried out with a cutoff date of May 28, 2021, covering the Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. The data search focused on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective or controlled comparator-arm studies, SRs, and meta-analyses. Evidence synthesis was conducted using modified GRADE criteria as outlined for all the EAU guidelines.
All chapters of the RCC guideline were updated on the basis of a structured literature assessment, and clinical practice recommendations were developed. The majority of the studies included were retrospective with matched or unmatched cohorts and were based on single- or multi-institution data or national registries. The exception was systemic treatment of metastatic RCC, for which there are several large RCTs, resulting in recommendations that are based on higher levels of evidence.
The 2022 RCC guidelines have been updated by a multidisciplinary panel of experts using the highest methodological standards. These guidelines provide the most reliable contemporary evidence base for the management of RCC in 2022.
The European Association of Urology panel for guidelines on kidney cancer has thoroughly evaluated the research data available to establish up-to-date international standards for the care of patients with kidney cancer.
The European Association of Urology Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC) Guideline Panel has prepared evidence-based guidelines and recommendations for the management of RCC.
To provide an updated RCC ...guideline based on standardised methodology including systematic reviews, which is robust, transparent, reproducible, and reliable.
For the 2019 update, evidence synthesis was undertaken based on a comprehensive and structured literature assessment for new and relevant data. Where necessary, formal systematic reviews adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were undertaken. Relevant databases (Medline, Cochrane Libraries, trial registries, conference proceedings) were searched until June 2018, including randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective or controlled studies with a comparator arm, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Where relevant, risk of bias (RoB) assessment, and qualitative and quantitative syntheses of the evidence were performed. The remaining sections of the document were updated following a structured literature assessment. Clinical practice recommendations were developed and issued based on the modified GRADE framework.
All chapters of the RCC guidelines were updated based on a structured literature assessment, for prioritised topics based on the availability of robust data. For RCTs, RoB was low across studies. For most non-RCTs, clinical and methodological heterogeneity prevented pooling of data. The majority of included studies were retrospective with matched or unmatched cohorts, based on single- or multi-institutional data or national registries. The exception was for the treatment of metastatic RCC, for which there were several large RCTs, resulting in recommendations based on higher levels of evidence.
The 2019 RCC guidelines have been updated by the multidisciplinary panel using the highest methodological standards. These guidelines provide the most reliable contemporary evidence base for the management of RCC in 2019.
The European Association of Urology Renal Cell Carcinoma Guideline Panel has thoroughly evaluated the available research data on kidney cancer to establish international standards for the care of kidney cancer patients.
The 2019 European Association of Urology renal cell cancer guidelines have been updated by a multidisciplinary panel of experts, based on the highest methodological standards. These guidelines provide the most reliable contemporaneous evidence base for the management of patients with renal cell cancer in 2019.
Abstract Context Partial nephrectomy (PN) is the current gold standard treatment for small localized renal tumors.; however, the impact of duration and type of intraoperative ischemia on renal ...function (RF) after PN is a subject of significant debate. Objective To review the current evidence on the relationship of intraoperative ischemia and RF after PN. Evidence acquisition A review of English-language publications on renal ischemia and RF after PN was performed from 2005 to 2014 using the Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. Ninety-one articles were selected with the consensus of all authors and analyzed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria. Evidence synthesis The vast majority of reviewed studies were retrospective, nonrandomized observations. Based on the current literature, RF recovery after PN is strongly associated with preoperative RF and the amount of healthy kidney parenchyma preserved. Warm ischemia time (WIT) is modifiable and prolonged warm ischemia is significantly associated with adverse postoperative RF. Available data suggest a benefit of keeping WIT <25 min, although the level of evidence to support this threshold is limited. Cold ischemia safely facilitates longer durations of ischemia. Surgical techniques that minimize or avoid global ischemia may be associated with improved RF outcomes. Conclusions Although RF recovery after PN is strongly associated with quality and quantity of preserved kidney, efforts should be made to limit prolonged WIT. Cold ischemia should be preferred when longer ischemia is expected, especially in presence of imperative indications for PN. Additional research with higher levels of evidence is needed to clarify the optimal use of renal ischemia during PN. Patient summary In this review of the literature, we looked at predictors of renal function after surgical resection of renal tumors. There is a strong association between the quality and quantity of renal tissue that is preserved after surgery and long-term renal function. The time of interruption of renal blood flow during surgery is an important, modifiable predictor of postoperative renal function.
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.
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 naïve). This applies to all risk groups as determined by the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium criteria.
Pembrolizumab plus axitinib are recommended as a new standard of care in all International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) risk groups. For treatment-naïve IMDC intermediate- and poor-risk patients, ipilimumab plus nivolumab remains the standard treatment. Sunitinib, pazopanib, and cabozantinib (in IMDC intermediate- and poor-risk disease) are alternative treatment options in patients who cannot receive or tolerate immune checkpoint inhibition in a first-line setting.
Longer follow-up and new trial data from phase 3 randomised controlled trials investigating immune checkpoint blockade (PD-1 or its ligand PD-L1) in advanced clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) ...have recently become available. The CheckMate 9ER trial demonstrated an improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) benefit for the combination of cabozantinib plus nivolumab. A Keynote-426 update demonstrated an ongoing OS benefit for pembrolizumab plus axitinib in the intention-to-treat population, with a PFS benefit seen across all International Metastatic Database Consortium (IMDC) subgroups, while an update of CheckMate 214 confirmed the long-term benefit of ipilimumab plus nivolumab in IMDC intermediate and poor risk patients. The RCC Guidelines Panel continues to recommend these tyrosine kinase inhibitors + immunotherapy (IO) combination across IMDC risk groups in advanced first-line RCC and dual immunotherapy of ipilimumab and nivolumab in IMDC intermediate and poor risk.
New data from trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors for advanced kidney cancer confirm a survival benefit with the combination of cabozantinib plus nivolumab and pembrolizumab plus axitinib and ipilimumab plus nivolumab. These combination therapies are recommended as first-line treatment for advanced kidney cancer.
Longer follow-up data and new trial data from phase 3 randomised controlled trials investigating immune checkpoint blockade (PD-1 or its ligand PD-L1) in advanced clear-cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) have recently become available. A recent update of Keynote-426 demonstrated an ongoing overall survival benefit for pembrolizumab plus axitinib in the intention-to-treat population, with a progression-free survival benefit seen across all International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) subgroups. The RCC Guidelines Panel continues to recommend this combination across IMDC risk groups in advanced first-line RCC.
The impact of resection technique on partial nephrectomy outcomes is controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the pattern of resection techniques during partial nephrectomy and the impact ...on perioperative outcomes, acute kidney injury, positive surgical margins and the achievement of the Trifecta (negative surgical margins, no perioperative Clavien-Dindo grade 2 or greater surgical complications and no postoperative acute kidney injury).
We prospectively collected data on consecutive patients with cT1-2N0M0 renal masses treated with partial nephrectomy at a total of 16 referral centers from September 2014 to March 2015. After partial nephrectomy the resection technique was classified by the surgeon as enucleation, enucleoresection or resection according to the SIB (Surface-Intermediate-Base) margin scores 0 to 2, 3 or 4 and 5, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was done to evaluate the potential impact of the resection technique on postoperative surgical complications, positive surgical margins, acute kidney injury and Trifecta achievement.
Overall 507 patients were included in analysis. The resection technique was classified as enucleation in 266 patients (52%), enucleoresection in 150 (30%) and resection in 91 (18%). The resection technique (enucleoresection vs enucleation and resection) was the only significant predictor of positive surgical margins. Tumor complexity, surgical approach (open and laparoscopic vs robotic) and resection technique (enucleoresection vs enucleation) were significant predictors of Clavien-Dindo grade 2 or greater surgical complications. The surgical approach (open and laparoscopic vs robotic), the resection technique (enucleoresection vs enucleation) and warm ischemia time were significantly associated with postoperative acute kidney injury and Trifecta achievement.
Resection techniques significantly impact surgical complications, early functional outcomes and positive surgical margins after partial nephrectomy of localized renal masses.
The randomised phase III clinical trial Checkmate-214 showed a survival superiority for the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab when compared with the previous standard of care in first-line ...metastatic/advanced clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) (Escudier B, Tannir NM, McDermott DF, et al. CheckMate 214: efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab vs sunitinib for treatment-naïve advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma, including IMDC risk and PD-L1 expression subgroups. LBA5, ESMO 2017, 2017). These results change the frontline standard of care for this disease and have implications for the selection of subsequent therapies. For this reason the European Association of Urology RCC guidelines have been updated.
The European Association of Urology guidelines will be updated based on the results of the phase III Checkmate-214 clinical trial. The trial showed superior survival for a combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab (IN), compared with the previous standard of care, in intermediate- and poor-risk patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma. When IN is not safe or feasible, alternative agents such as sunitinib, pazopanib, and cabozantinib should be considered. Furthermore, at present, the data from the trial are immature in favourable-risk patients. Therefore, sunitinib or pazopanib remains the favoured agent for this subgroup of patients.
Based on the Checkmate-214 trial, the European Association of Urology guidelines, which will be updated, recommend ipilimumab and nivolumab (IN) as the standard of care in intermediate- and poor-risk patients with metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma. Alternative agents such as sunitinib, pazopanib, and cabozantinib should be considered when IN is not safe or feasible. At present, in favourable-risk patients, the data from the trial are immature. Therefore, sunitinib or pazopanib remains the preferred agent in this subgroup of patients.
Radio-induced apoptosis is mediated by the activation of tumor protein p53, Bax and caspases. The purpose of this study was to investigate the early activation of this pathway in men receiving in ...vivo irradiation immediately before radical prostatectomy for locally advanced prostate cancer. We also investigated cell proliferation index (Ki-67), proto-oncogene (p53) and anti-apoptotic protein (Bcl-2) levels as potential predictive factors. We selected a homogeneous sample of 20 patients with locally advanced prostate cancer and candidate to radical prostatectomy. To assess the apoptotic pathways, Bax, is studied through immunofluorescence assay, before and after 12 Gy single dose intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) to the prostate, on bioptic samples and on surgical specimens. Moreover, before and after IORT, Bcl-2, p53, and Ki-67 were also detected through immunohistochemistry. A count of positive Bax spots for immunofluorescence was performed on tumor cells, prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN), and healthy tissue areas before and after IORT. We also analyzed Caspases 3 and 9 expressions after IORT. Before IORT, Bcl-2 mean value in neoplastic cells was 2.23% ± 1.95, mean Ki-67 in neoplastic area was 4.5% ± 3.8, and p53 was 22.5% ± 6.8. After IORT, Bcl-2 mean value in neoplastic cells was 8.85 ± 8.92%, Ki-67 in neoplastic area was 7.8 ± 6.09%, and p53 was 24.9 ± 26.4%. After the irradiation, healthy areas expressed significantly lower levels of Bax (2.81 ± 1.69%) with respect to neoplastic cells (p < 0.0001), while in PIN areas, Bax positive cells were significantly more present than in neoplastic areas (p = 0.0001). At statistical analysis, it was observed that cancer cells with Ki-67 ≥ 8% had a trend toward greater expression of Bax (p = 0.0641). We observed an increase of Bcl-2 expression after IORT in neoplastic areas (p = 0.0041). Biopsy specimens with p53 ≥ 18% and Ki-67 ≥ 8% had worse post-operative staging with extracapsular invasion (p = 0.04 for both parameters) and nodal positivity (p = 0.04 for p53 and p = 0.0001 at pathology for ki-67). No correlation between IORT and Caspases activation was noted. In conclusion, after 12 Gy IORT, Bax was overexpressed in tumor and PIN cells. Pre-operative Ki-67 and p53 definition could be used in future studies to predict patients with worse pathological stage, while Bcl-2 activation after IORT might be a predictive factor for loco-regional failure.
Abstract Context While vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy and mammalian target of rapamycin inhibition are effective strategies in treating clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC), ...the most effective therapeutic approach for patients with non-clear cell RCC (non-ccRCC) is unknown. Objective To systematically review relevant literature comparing the oncological outcomes and adverse events of different systemic therapies for patients with metastatic non-ccRCC. Evidence acquisition Relevant databases including MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched up to March 24, 2016. Only comparative studies were included. Risk of bias and confounding assessments were performed. A meta-analysis was planned for and only performed if methodologically appropriate; otherwise, a narrative synthesis was undertaken. Evidence synthesis The literature search identified 812 potential titles and abstracts. Five randomized controlled trials, recruiting a total of 365 patients, were included. Three studies compared sunitinib against everolimus, one of which reported the results for non-ccRCC as a subgroup rather than as an entire randomized cohort. Individually, the studies showed a trend towards favoring sunitinib in terms of overall survival and progression-free survival (PFS; Everolimus versus Sunitinib in Patients with Metastatic Non-clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma hazard ratio HR: 1.41, 80% confidence interval CI 1.03–1.92 and 1.41, 95% CI: 0.88–2.27, Evaluation in Metastatic Non-clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma HR: 1.16, 95% CI: 0.67–2.01, Efficacy and Safety Comparison of RAD001 Versus Sunitinib in the First-line and Second-line Treatment of Patients with Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma HR: 1.5, 95% CI: 0.9–2.8), but this trend did not reach statistical significance in any study. Meta-analysis was performed on two studies which solely recruited patients with non-ccRCC reporting on PFS, the results of which were inconclusive (HR: 1.30, 95% CI: 0.91–1.86). Sunitinib was associated with more Grade 3–4 adverse events than everolimus, although this was not statistically significant. Conclusions This systematic review and meta-analysis represent a robust summary of the evidence base for systemic treatment of metastatic non-ccRCC. The results show a trend towards favoring vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy for PFS and overall survival compared with mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors, although statistical significance was not reached. The relative benefits and harms of these treatments remain uncertain. Further research, either in the form of an individual patient data meta-analysis involving all relevant trials, or a randomized controlled trial with sufficient power to detect potential differences between treatments, is needed. Patient summary We examined the literature to determine the most effective treatments for advanced kidney cancer patients whose tumors are not of the clear cell subtype. The results suggest that a drug called sunitinib might be more effective than everolimus, but the statistics supporting this statement are not yet entirely reliable. Further research is required to clarify this unmet medical need.
Background
Aim of this study was to evaluate and compare perioperative outcomes of transperitoneal (TP) and retroperitoneal (TR) approaches in a multi-institutional cohort of minimally invasive ...partial nephrectomy (MI-PN).
Material and methods
All consecutive patients undergone MI-PN for clinical T1 renal tumors at 26 Italian centers (RECORd2 project) between 01/2013 and 12/2016 were evaluated, collecting the pre-, intra-, and postoperative data. The patients were then stratified according to the surgical approach, TP or RP. A 1:1 propensity score (PS) matching was performed to obtain homogeneous cohorts, considering the age, gender, baseline eGFR, surgical indication, clinical diameter, and PADUA score.
Results
1669 patients treated with MI-PN were included in the study, 1256 and 413 undergoing TP and RP, respectively. After 1:1 PS matching according to the surgical access, 413 patients were selected from TP group to be compared with the 413 RP patients. Concerning intraoperative variables, no differences were found between the two groups in terms of surgical approach (lap/robot), extirpative technique (enucleation vs standard PN), hilar clamping, and ischemia time. Conversely, the TP group recorded a shorter median operative time in comparison with the RP group (115 vs 150 min), with a higher occurrence of intraoperative overall, 21 (5.0%) vs 9 (2.1%);
p
= 0.03, and surgical complications, 18 (4.3%) vs 7 (1.7%);
p
= 0.04. Concerning postoperative variables, the two groups resulted comparable in terms of complications, positive surgical margins and renal function, even if the RP group recorded a shorter median drainage duration and hospital length of stay (3 vs 2 for both variables),
p
< 0.0001.
Conclusions
The results of this study suggest that both TP and RP are feasible approaches when performing MI-PN, irrespectively from tumor location or surgical complexity. Notwithstanding longer operative times, RP seems to have a slighter intraoperative complication rate with earlier postoperative recovery when compared with TP.
PDF
